Ehm, what? Getting returns from ocdb is the same as getting curation rewards basically, not sure what you mean with them voting themselves?
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Ehm, what? Getting returns from ocdb is the same as getting curation rewards basically, not sure what you mean with them voting themselves?
A bad example in retrospect.., I'm tired and a little grouchy tonight. If it wasn't for the larger stakeholders.., there would be no votes of any worth... and @solominer kind of hit a nerve.
no worries just sounded a bit flawed. There are however projects that do that and some thriving, i.e. delegate to us and get a guaranteed vote on your daily posts worth ~10x more than what you could self-vote. Either they give back some token or hive returns but they mainly take into consideration the delegators when curating which is very wrong.
I think my point was that if @usera has 50,000 HP and delegates 99% of it to @ocdb.., and you give them a nice chunky vote for their great post, comment on it, they can't even give you a comment vote back in appreciation, never mind looking at my stuff and voting for it.
The delegation takes away their power and moves it elsewhere. A portion of the stake I feel is good.., but 99% of it rubs me the wrong way.
This is the reason 99% of my stake is my own, because I want control of it. I am not saying my way is the right way, but it works for me. Each to their own ideals.
What you describe above is something akin to the bid-bots in disguise.
oh yeah definitely get that, doesn't matter what APR projects offer, it's a bit meh to have no voting power. There's definitely plenty of accounts doing that though, maybe we need to hike up RC costs for stuff. :P
Thank you @slobberchops for articulating your position...I have been trying to put the same into words for myself as I am of the same opinion.
Appreciate the clarity @acidyo .
You don't see a difference between centralized and decentralized voting?
Are you serious?