That's shit though. If I decide to pay $1 a month on patreon to someone because I like their content is worth paying $1 for, that dollar would go to that person, even if everyone else doesn't like their content and I'm literally that person's only patron.
If I vote on something, it's because I like it, or think it stimulates discussion or something of that nature, and it should be the same as if I pledged to them on patreon - it should go to that creator. I have reasonably low sp (but that could change) so my vote might not benefit the content I vote on just because of that, but I am not okay with my vote not rewarding the person I voted for because other people don't see the value in what I upvoted. Under a system where my vote might not support the content I want to support, I'd rather not vote on anything at all.
Just give up dear friend....
They're not listening.
😁😁
It is noteworthy that many do not grasp that flags are in fact canceling the VP of voters, rather than taking the SP of creators.
Now we have 25% more flags to fly, and soon we'll have 99% less content to vote on. Steem will no longer have value derived from a market for it when it is all concentrated in the accounts that ninjamined it (and their socks). Plan accordingly.
Tipping and voting with a shared inflation pool are very different. Tipu currently allows you to send tips to people and I hope that we have more UI imbedded ways to do so in the future, but the comparison you are attempting doesn’t make much sense.
Maybe it's not completely comparable, but that doesn't matter. Regardless of the ins and outs of how upvoting works, if I upvote something, my upvote shouldn't be worth nothing to the content I upvote just because other people don't agree. Whether it's an upvote, a donation, a tip, cryptocurrency or fiat money, popularity shouldn't dictate what my actions reward.
Popularity should play a role to a degree, which it already did in the form of things with more upvotes (or higher power upvotes - I've definitely had posts with less upvotes be worth more than ones with heaps of them due to SP) getting more rewards, and all platforms are like that to a degree, because YT for example is the same if the content isn't demonetised (more views = more ads that pay you).
However, the part of this update to Steem that makes your upvote useless if not enough other people upvote, is based on false logic. It mentions quality in its reasoning which means it assumes popular = quality.
Logan Paul, reality TV, and people posting stuff saying certain disorders / disabilities / health issues that do exist don't exist or shitcanning various science-backed (or if not scientically backed, at least harmless - ie Miracle Mineral Solution etc should be criticised) treatment options for health issues are all proof that popularity doesn't equal quality. All of these things are popular with certain groups and I would not say any of this is quality. The last two can be downright harmful and add to stigma surrounding the disorder / disability / health issue and it's various treatment options. But other people out there obviously do think it is quality enough to watch it, read it or believe it. These things are relatively popular.
But some things that are popular are actually good quality. And those things deserve to be rewarded for being quality. They are popular because they are good quality, but often also because they got found or came into the market at the right time etc.
However, the fact that some popular things are quality and some aren't, means that Steem is wrong in equating popularity with quality. Also, unless Steem Power plays zero role in the value of posts from now on, this focus on popularity won't work anyway because a post with less upvotes can still be rewarded more than a post with more upvotes, simply due to the power of the person upvoting. That translates to more popularity with powerful people, rather than more popularity in general.
Clearly, there are some major logic flaws in the approach they are presenting, due to quality and popularity not having a consistent relationship (this lack of a consistent relationship is also one of multiple reasons why liking or disliking things because they are popular - being a sheep or a hipster depending on if it is liking or disliking - as opposed to just liking what you like and not taking into account popularity is idiotic) and due to Steem Power not being moot and making only the number of upvotes matter.
Popularity pretty much always has to play some kind of role and it did in Steem in the past via more upvotes tending to mean more rewards (but again it depends because of Steem Power) and it is the same on other platforms too, but not rewarding less popular things at all even when people signalled "yes this is quality and I want to reward it" via an upvote is also wrong. This disincentivises rewarding content you truly believe in and like if you think it might not be what the community will like. Only rewarding the more popular stuff also will likely just create an echo chamber or circle jerk of less original content just reinforcing the same points of view or showing the same things that people seem to like on here. It's the same as people following trends or making types of content that just "seem to work" on YouTube because it gets more views and while combining a trend within your normal content if possible isn't too bad (ie on YouTube Scott Manley did a "bottle flip" video with a rocket in Kerbal Space Program which was a bit of fun), people following trends and choosing types of content to make based on what is popular instead of stuff they are passionate about and can do well is harmful to creative integrity and good quality content and harmful to the platform it is part of (note: people making popular content or following trends may also do it because they think it looks fun or they like it and that's not harmful to quality etc - doing it because it is the popular thing is).
Some people may keep their creative integrity and keep their content their own without changing it to appeal to a larger audience to get the little bits they were getting before this from dedicated fans on here and this is a good thing compared to them changing for the wrong reasons, but now they are more likely to change or just simply leave the platform (a decent chunk of small creators seem to be doing the latter).
The main value Steem offers to small creators - the fact that small creators are treated better here and rewarded better here and feel more like they matter and aren't a mere spec but are part of the whole community than they are on other platforms - has been very heavily diluted by this change and it wouldn't surprise me if many leave and don't come back because the main value offered to them is gone and this also signals an attitude shift towards small creators too because now popularity (and power because SP still is playing a role) indicates if you can be rewarded at all as opposed to just the amount you tend to get rewarded, which suggests an attitude that unpopular things aren't worth rewarding at all, even if the unpopular thing attracts a small but passionate fanbase who upvotes them. That fanbase should be able to reward the content they are a fan of, even if the content isn't popular. This change does display a negative attitude to small creators on here and that's destroying one of Steem's major benefits.
Regardless of any of this though, the fact is I am not okay with an upvote I make not supporting the content I want it to support. Yes, under this system, it can be a nice signal to them, much like a like on other platforms and previously at times a single upvote would still only really be that due to a single upvote not being enough to earn anything, but the bar to make upvotes support people is too high now. I am not okay with it being ignored just because other people don't like or maybe don't see the same content and think it should be rewarded. While the mechanism might be different, I'd equally not be okay with patreon deciding not to reward a creator with my pledge as I am not okay with my upvote not helping someone get rewarded on their post. I don't care if they are different. I am equally not okay with either of those things happening because I'm not okay with my attempts at rewarding people to be made moot due to the popularity of the thing I'm rewarding, regardless of if it is from a rewards pool or my own direct money.