Been spending quite a lot of time and brain power trying to make sense of a situation that somehow either keeps getting misunderstood or at this point is getting misunderstood on purpose, I think. Either way, wanted to bring some attention to this particular case and yet again post about curation on Hive. Let me start off by saying that curation is definitely not easy, while the word has been overused and means a ton of different things due to this chain, I'm mostly referring to the manual concept of it and the one that's meant to reward quality content, engagement and activity and in general things you feel bring value to the platform without overdoing it. As you can tell by that comment, the lines can get blurry easily and quickly and often times most of it is generally accepted and people don't start nitpicking too much unless it goes overboard a lot. It's quite a subjective thing in general, similar like quality or art is subjective, so can curation be and the line where it pushes some stakeholders to want to intervene while others maybe would have done so as well if downvotes weren't such a pain in the ass for everyone involved most of the time.
That said, I'm not an expert at curation and neither is my curation project, while we do strive to improve and I believe have done so over the past many years of running, there will always be something slightly wrong with it or unfair based on who's looking and what reasons they're looking at it for. My own curation isn't perfect neither, some days it can be quite lazy browsing through my feed barely even reading the full posts or checking out all the pictures/video content, other times it can be more thorough even going so far as going outside of my feed to check on random communities or if I'm feeling extra daring check the recent "all" posts from all communities and non-communities.
One of the big things that swept this chain many years ago when it switched to the linear curation curve that we have now again was the so called "bid bots". Linear curve means that based on how much HP you have and at what percentage your voting power is, you'll always give the same vote no matter how many others have voted before. At the same time downvoting thing would cost upvote mana, meaning those who wanted to downvote things would end up losing curation reward and thus APR compared to everyone else except the author and curators of the post they downvoted. Bid bots basically turned the 50% curation rewards and 50% author rewards on its head, those who weren't selling their votes would quickly come to regret it because their neighbor who was was earning substaintially more rewards than them. A simple example of this would be that I'd send you 5 Hive and you'd give me a vote which after payout would result in 5.5 hive, i.e. 0.5 hive profit, the upvoter would get half of those rewards as curation rewards but also keep the 5 hive, effectively getting up to 90% returns rather than the 50% the blockchain rules stated. So you can imagine that two similarsized stakeholders, one was earning 8.5% APR on his curation while the other was earning almost double that.
What did that do, well, it removed curation or the basis of curating content based on effort, quality, activity and consumption from the equation and instead gave votes to whoever paid for it. Good authors had to also start paying for it because every day more and more stake would set itself up to sell their votes rather than give them out "for free". In the meantime you also had your vote trading cliques that didn't care much for selling votes because they were already quite comfortably trading votes with other similar-sized stakeholders. This vote-trading also kind of defeats the purpose of curation and the 50/50 rules because while your daily voting power is spread out over at least 10 votes, if you trade your vote with 9 other users it meant that you were pretty much giving your 10 daily votes to your 1 daily post. This also removed any users without stake from the equation of ever receiving votes from this stake as they were busy trading votes with each other and potentially even buying votes on top of it. Close to no "free upvotes", i.e. curation was occurring at that time.
While things did change after a while and I'm not going to go into what happened then here as this is already getting a bit unnecessary long without me even having started discussing the case I wanted to discuss, let's instead get into this other form of "vote-trading" or "buying votes".
Delegation in exchange for votes.
I guess this one is a lot more like vote-trading rather than buying votes, although I am seeing quite a few projects try both of them and unfortunately get quite far as well. Here's some of the examples of how this works and why it's not good for the ecosystem.
You delegate a certain amount of HP to another account
Imagine you have 10 other accounts at your disposal and 100k HP, if you delegate 10k to each of the oher accounts and post once per day and leave 9 comments but you never use the same account to upvote yourself and instead have the other 10 accounts you've delegated to upvote your posts and comments, it's not selfvoting, right? Well, it still is, it even is if you're not the one personally doing it in a way.You delegate a certain amount of HP to another account and get layer 2 tokens in exchange for your delegation
The other scheme I've seen lately that has been growing in amount of accounts/projects doing it is where they receive tokens in exchange for their delegations and with those tokens trigger the account to give them a hive upvote on their post. Similarly to votetrading this also in a way means you're using apprixmately 100% of your daily upvote mana to upvote your one post thus not leaving any mana for other users which defeats curation.
These are pretty much the "worst case" examples, then there's milder versions of it, some of them even you and me can particularly be a part of even if you don't mean to. For instance there's some stakeholders that automatically upvote whatever I post, while I appreciate that and try not to abuse it by shitposting or forcing myself to post twice daily, it would be even more wrong if I spent all of my voting power back on their posts. I do spend some of it on some of them because I genuinely read what they create and many of them who do upvote me I'm sure have other motives to do so than just wanting to support my posts or journey on Hive, but if I acted upon it with self-interest it wouldn't be right.
As an example, let's take the @ocd account, even though most of its delegators are quite passive investors of which I assume delegate because they like what we're doing with our curation and what it means for new users to Hive and future potential stakeholders, things would be different if we spent a lot of daily voting power upvoting those who delegate mainly.
A recent case which I had an issue with was as follows, the curator spent quite a bit of the daily voting mana to not just make sure the posts of those who delegate get upvoted but since they didn't post that often he'd go out of his way to give them higher returns through voting up their comments. This was quite a special case, for one the delegators didn't even seem to be expecting any returns as the delegations they had sent were meant to support a community that curator runs and thus support the users posting there. Instead it was the curator that insisted these delegators get rewarded more because they were delegating to him which in turn meant he received higher curation rewards.
Not only does this take away voting power that could've been used to others posting in that community, since that's his focus to curate, but it generates this unfairness where he gets more rewards while the delegators barely lose out on having delegated their stake out. Let's compare it to @ocdb for instance, this account sends back 85-90% of its daily curation rewards to its delegators. In exchange it doesn't promise or insist that these delegators get extra perks or returns in other ways than those liquid rewards. There's been many times random people who've asked me what the perks are for delegating to @ocdb and I've told them that there are none, it won't affect how we curate and who we curate because that wouldn't be right to curation and the way it is meant to be used.
To put it another way, as a user and stakeholder on hive, your post rewards aren't guaranteed, one could even go as far as to say your curation rewards aren't guaranteed but that's a way more unique case than post rewards. For instance, if you're constantly posting plagiarised or AI created content, the community is most likely going to downvote that sooner or later which means that your pending post rewards will be removed. If all you had voted that week was also similar content that gets downvoted, that means that your curation rewards of the votes that had landed on such posts are gone as well.
There's easy solutions to this if you feel you're unsure of how to vote or if you don't wanna risk voting on content that may get downvoted. You can follow a trail, meaning you can copy the votes of another user, one with a track record of not voting on things that get downvoted, i.e. curator. Or you can delegate your HP out to projects that either return them in a certain way minus a certain fee or return them in the form of a layer 2 token instead by either issuing out new tokens or buying up tokens with your Hive curation rewards, or lastlty they won't return anything and assume you donated/sponsored that hive power for their activity.
So, your curation rewards if you want to optimize them will net you about 8.5% APR by voting on content that doesn't get downvoted, but in the same go, your post rewards can be quite a lot more randomized. Post rewards should not be a fixed APR % and votes landing on your content shouldn't come with contracts and predetermined deals you may have done in exchange for your own votes. Why? Because it defeats the purpose of curation. Think about it, when you vote on posts, you either vote because A, you like the content, B, you think it is of high quality, C, you appreciate the effort and time this author has put into creating this content, D, you really like this author, E, you don't have a lot of time but sitting at 100% voting power means you're losing future returns so you just cast the vote and don't think much about it, etc. There can be many reasons to vote for posts and most of them are okay as long the intentions weren't to maximize your own post rewards in a direct/blind way like oblivious vote-trading.
Don't get me wrong, hivepower and votingpower are definite tools to garner attention and in return get votes back on your content, I don't think anyone can deny that and while there's not that much value in attention right now since the userbase here is quite small, things may surely change over time. This is the same reason that bid bots remained profitable in the past, there were barely any users, those posting and using them were only looking for that 5-10% profit cause they knew consumption didn't really exist for marketing/ads. The same reason that leasing hivepower right now is only a little bit more expensive than the returns that hive power brings you over time resulting in people leasing HP mainly trading votes with others doing the same so they can through the 50% of post rewards come out profitable after the cost of leasing and the middlemen fees.
While hivepower and your votes definitely can bring you more returns on your posts over time that way is a lot more genuine than the way some people do it when they're trying to cut corners.
Anyway, this post got pretty long and as you can maybe tell this is quite a difficult subject as it covers quite a lot of ground and different examples and angles of how people go about doing things right and potentially wrong. I may have to start a series around this going through each and every case in detail while trying to imagine all possible examples of its usage I can think of, but for now I think I'm going to end it here and maybe some newcomers I've noticed appearing in my comments may learn something new or at least what to avoid when continuing on their Hive journey.
Thanks for reading.
Random images from pixabay.com as banners
Let's be real.. Most of them really delegate to get attention or just think that if they delegate, OCD will start voting them xD (Not talking about major investors/supporters)
Not saying OCD does it, but I heard it from multiple people that they have delegated for that sole reason. I also ran my delegations rewards distribution bot on a community I admin, so I got some sort of a first hand experience regarding why folks with smaller stakes delegate usually, considering I had to interact directly with most of them, and that seems why the majority of them do it, whether they say it or not.
They get unhappy when they don't get special treatment, or WORSE, they are surprised when their plagiarism or AI doesn't get ignored.
But I do agree that there are also many good supporters, who do delegate because they just like the community and what it's doing.
Back to the topic, however. There are Multiple projects / communities who are doing some sort of vote selling one way or another. I don't want to directly name some, because I'm sure I'll forget others.
But some Brothers for example justify their hold x and get vote selling scheme with "we have a minimum standard of 500 words for posts" (To be fair, that one doesn't offer it as the only reason to hold their token, but still.)
Another justify their points usage as the initiation of the voting on the post is "manual". Or a Neo-vote seller justifies it with "it's only a couple of bucks max" and hiding the rest with other forms of "lotteries" as far as I know.
Then we have the whole circle-jerking aspect, with groups of probably actual friends only voting eachother.
The line really gets blurry sometimes, and I'm not sure if such practices would eventually get abolished as the userbase grows, or it would actually get worse.
We certainly hope for the former!
Because I do think with more options and varieties, it gets easier and less time consuming to find curation worthy posts from authentic authors, and there would certainly be better distribution among them.
Yeah it's no surprise that many delegate for hopes of special treatment and as I've experience myself those receiving delegation insisting on special treatment. It always just comes down to profit, if delegating gets you more profit and those receiving the delegation get profit then it's all good, right? It's like they don't stop to think who here is on the losing end of their deal or just don't care to find out. I honestly think stakeholders are way too nice about their downvotes when it comes to cases like these and while I've been trying to become more active there it's really not easy work and quite timeconsuming, especially when you have hundred other things to do.
There's close to no reason why smaller stakeholders should even delegate their stake away, we often recommend them to use it to gain followers and attention towards their own post, even if it's not worth a cent or two if u vote along with a comment it's worth more than voting 0 and leaving comments while your stake is away at some random project. Curation projects delegation for reward systems should really just be there for if you have no interest in voting at all or you're going to go afk for a while.
Just a quick question:
By small stakeholders you would mean people under 1K HP?
Hive doesn't really have a general manual that carefully guides newbies, newbies tend to read different articles from different people with different belief system at the end of the day most people just study what their friends or role models do.
So I would want to know at what point can a Hivean be able to delegate their HP.
Thank you.
You can delegate at any time really, we've also made it possible with @ocdb that even tiny delegations get returns. Point is that if you are active and willing, it's much better put to use by actively voting others yourself and trying to build connections and longterm relationships.
Ohhh this makes more sense.
Last Question please.
Since we are on the topic of curation, I got a huge delegation from someone recently and I want to use the delegation well, so ideally what is the best way of voting Hiveans posts? I mean the right way of setting your vote percentage so you don't burn out too fast and so people can also benefit from your voting power.
It recharges about 20% per day, technically you can give 10-11 full votes per day if you're trying to maximize the output of value (say when you're getting close to 100% voting power, let's say 99.99%, you cast one vote, you then wait 2-3h to cast the next 100% vote at 99.99% voting power, etc) but there's not a lot of point to this method as you don't profit from it more, it's just about how big of a vote you want to give others.
Voting power is quite flexible, if you are at 50% voting power and cast a 100% vote, it's technically just a 50% vote but instead of burning 2% voting power as it would do at 100% voting power, it only burns 1% so you get back to 50% voting power twice as fast as if you wanted to wait to get to 100% voting power.
It can get complicated to explain it, but basically keep it between 80 and 90% and do 10 full votes per day or 20x 50% votes per day or 40x 25% votes per day, etc. The important thing for yourself is to not let it sit at 100% voting mana as that may cause you to lose out on potential curation rewards.
Lol and it is complicated to understand as I read it like thrice, so I'll just leave it between the 80 and 90% like you pointed out as well.
Thanks a lot for this explanation as I’d be able to carry out my voting properly 🙏🙏
How it work o what can they really do, to get lets say views , sometimes they are just not able to vote on those post ? O they just no see the post? Is akward i'm making a general question and not a single person make a reply...
Tags?
I had a quick look at your wallet, please do not vote for witnesses like earn.hive, casting your witness vote is meant to be cast on witnesses you trust to keep the ecosystem safe. It's not meant to be "bought" by stakeholders cause if everyone voted to those who gave them a cut it would jeaopardize our security and decentralization so I hope you reconsider.
Ohhhhhh I had no idea, I didn't look at it from that perspective, thanks for point it out for me😃
Yeah man. Nice post. I like.
It's a good reminder for us of how things were, how they are right now, and how we can still improve here. Genuine and authentic curation does need a deeper understanding of the concept and idea of content-orientated platforms like Hive. But we also have to respect the investment point of view, whereas the (passive) investor can just see that an investment is bad or good (usually casting a vote on good content is the best investment versus self-voting could lead to a bad investment).
Anyway :D
@ocdb is a great initiative, the main reason I delegate to OCDB and other curation projects is mainly because it is keeping users here long enough to love it here, and I wanna be part of it. Personally, I think everyone should delegate at least a few HPs to curation projects -if- they are genuine and authentic with their votes. I honestly couldn't care less for the fees that are subtracted from the curation rewards I would have gotten otherwise, but from an investment point of view, it would be dumb to disregard any rewards as growth is just as important especially if you are an advocate for decentralization, a 'good actor' and governance in overall.
Yes, this is a point that I'm afraid MANY fail to realize, or at least to fully appreciate. The long-term value of HIVE, from an investment standpoint, comes not from the 8.5% curation APR, but from the future growth of the platform and ecosystem itself. (With that said, as you alluded to, an investor would be foolish to simply forfeit that 8.5%).
My point is, growth is FAR MORE important, from an investment standpoint, than curation APR.
And, there's the inverse, which is also true:
As I've stated elsewhere, my take on rewards-pool distribution has been greatly influenced by @theycallmedan and his related comments the past several months on @cttpodcast, the essence of that being "the central (and crucial) feature of rewards-pool distribution is securing the censorship-resistance of Layer 1."
Whereas Bitcoin relies on PoW to secure its protocol, transactions, and wallets, Hive relies on parameterized DPoS to secure its protocol, transactions, and accounts. With PoS or DPoS, a truly decentralized distribution of the governance token is absolutely critical. HIVE has that, and HIVE has the protocols in place to keep it that way. ETH does not have that, and ETH's protocols will lead to even further centralization.
In other words, the rewards pool needs to be about decentralizing the relative distribution of the governance token, thus strengthening Hive's resistance to malicious censorship. I believe the underlying Hive protocols incentivize that future goal more than any other chain in existence.
And, it's important to note that when we talk about Layer 1 'censorship-resistance' we are not talking about censorship of posts or comments per se, we are talking about censorship of [1] any transactions (be they financial or informational) and, [2] more importantly, accounts themselves. Look at what happened to the @x and @music accounts on Twitter -- the 'owners' of both those accounts recently had them stripped away by Twitter, with zero recourse and zero compensation.
Centralization of governance is antithetical to freedom.
By now we tried various methods in the distribution of HIVE. But nothing seems to work properly IMHO. While you pointed out some forms of self-voting that emerged in which the self-vote itself is kinda hidden, I see quite a few users simply self-voting themselves. Some even get great rewards, from not only auto voters but also manual voters, including sometimes even votes from curator teams. Personally, when I vote with curator team powers, I like to vote for a user that makes nice contributions to HIVE-based blogging/engaging. Engagement is almost a must. I rarely vote for users that create GREAT posts but do not engage, or only drop some thank you comments, or rarely engage outside their own posts.
Like you, I don't know what a great curation should look like since I just try my best. However, what I think we can learn from the last 7 years is that money distribution based on distributed voting like we have here at HIVE, results in tons of money being distributed in ways it is not helping the service itself. Something that we need to address, again. However, we need to be rigorous in the next iteration. Perhaps we need to force all users that aren't active to hand over their vote powers to those that are actively trying to grant their votes to posts and users that deserve such a vote.
Most recently I noticed an old-time user writing his goodbye to the HIVE community in a nice way after receiving a few downvotes on his nicely rewarded posts. Some become angry, so I have to give it to this user; That he didn't get angry. However, those downvotes are quite deserved because the effort going into all his recent year(s) posts is next to nothing, whilst no engagement (hardly any) while receiving 10 to 20$ post rewards due to auto voters and such. This is just one example. Daily I come across such not wanted situations. Although I also found my ways not to come across many of such 'abusive' behaviours, since seeing too many of such, takes some of my positivity away ;)
I didn't understand Hive's voting initially, but I mostly get it now.
I've seen similar occurrences on previous social media I used. Personally, trading votes undermines quality "Content." Why put effort into great content when you can just trade votes?
I also explore different communities here. I became interested in the video community 3Speak. Many videos there aren't good; they appear basic and poorly made. It's strange that these videos get bigger rewards, even though I doubt many people watch them.
Still, the written articles here are truly excellent. You can learn a lot from the text-based content, especially in this post.
This is my first week on Hive, I hope the community values content quality over quick rewards.
Yeah similar during the bid bot era trending was a pile of garbage, or if you take a look at Steemit's trending today still where they went back to it after the hive hardfork.
and welcome to Hive! Giving you a follow to check what you'll post in the future!
I'm still figuring out where I fit in on this platform. I've been creating content as a freelancer for a while, and I've managed social media accounts before. However, this whole blockchain social media thing is new to me.
At the moment, I'm brainstorming ideas to share things that would be really useful to others on this platform. I'm not just trying to seem nice, honestly. The content here seems to be missing some real effort. My recent posts are just temporary and experimental.
I prefer making videos over writing, even though I also do some writing in my work.
Thanks for the follow.
Yeah value is subjective but I like to manually cruise through content and vote on that which I feel adds value to my life or the ecosystem in general (whether it gets downvoted or not). I don't delegate and I don't follow curation trails. Maybe I'm doing it wrong, maybe I'm not "maximizing my returns" but I think it's legit.
Oh definitely, I do the same on this account but with ocd there's a focus towards newer users and older underrewarded/overlooked ones and diverse other things that would take half an hour to go through all initiatives at this point, lol. It's fine to vote that way and it's also fine to just be like "oh I love this author, here's a vote" without even opening up the post, downvotes occurr so seldom and there's usually not much nitpicking like "oh this post is at $10 but I think $8 should be enough", it's usually reserved for the extreme cases so most voting power is quite safe to earn the base 8.5% APR usually.
When I first started blogging on hive, I had joined some curation trails for communities I was involved in. In one case, a lot of the content was simply giveaways, and I didn't like seeing my upvote used that way, so I quit using all of the different curation trails for that reason, and for other reasons. This is not to knock curators that do the curating in general, it just ended up being rather like a combination of voting non-quality content (giveaways that don't provide original/interesting content) and vote trading if these trails upvoted my content. To their credit, some of the curators running curation trails do a darn good job of managing what content they upvote, and it can be a good thing for content providers. However I prefer to do my own curating now, and I frequently, but not always, leave a comment with the poster to engage in dialog.
good article, and I appreciate your thoughts on here. Hive blogging is still a learning experience for me and many others. Thanks for sharing.
I guess it all boils down to some having a different yardstick to others. Whilst that's understandable and acceptable, what isn't, is people's stubborness and refusal to listen. If you have many people, and those people know what they're doing, tell you there's an issue with something, you'd listen and take their advice on board, right?
Yeah it's really baffling, especially when it comes from people who've been here a long time and should know better. It's like they're so obsessed with the rewards/returns that they bend over backwards just to pretend they're not understanding the issue at hand and do whatever it takes to not lose the obsessive maximization they've gotten used to. In the same go if you then do act upon it to try and enforce a fix on the issue with downvotes they turn around 180 instantly and mention how bad hive is, how there's something wrong with everything and everyone else except them. Dunno what to call it or what it is, is it the times?
That would pretty much eliminate accounts by new extremely low income members, unless they had a sponsor or saved up :( ...
This post has been manually curated by the VYB curation project
Leasing HP doesn't seem profitable short term.
My APR is around 9% right now and I am mostly paying 10,27% APR for those delegating to me.
But the extra 2-3% staking rewards are going to make it worth it in the long run :D
Good post buddy, ye its hard topic and everybody have a different option of it x)
Time is not what I have, so I follow a trail of someone who have been helping the anti-abuse scene for a while on Hive now.
So I fully trust him!
The issue there is and what I believe is the main issue and reason a lot of the activity exists on things like dlease, is that they aren't looking longterm like you but use that leased HP to vote-trade with which makes it profitable for them, those leasing their HP out to them and the middleman. Doesn't take a genius to figure out that the ones losing are the rest of the ecosystem not participating in votetrading, etc.
Ah, properly x)
Or leasing to selfvote is also a thing.
True, everybody else is losing
This is a nice write up.
I thought one get curated only if you got nice content but your post made me to understand things more better.
I am partially new on HIVE so I am still getting to learn more.
Most times I get sad and feel my post wasn’t good enough that’s why it was curated or that’s why it didn’t get so much votes.
Thank you so much for sharing this
I heard about curation. My friend who invited me to this platform has informed me about curation programs but I am unaware of it. Even I know that hive.vote is something which is related to curation but I don't know how that will operate. Moreover, delegation of hive is also not understandable concept to me.
But from your post I got to know that we delegate hive to someone's other account then they give us upvote. It's really like trading likes and stuff like that.
Yeah, except on web2 it doesn't really matter much if you fake likes and these numbers, but here you're pretty much taking value from everyone else not participating in such behavior so we really ought to nip it in the bud whenever we see such blatant use of votetrading or other similar schemes.
But you know I really feel bad for those people who are working hard on content but they don't know about curation and not generating that much reward.
a post I enjoyed reading and learning from. I once never saw the word "corrupt", though it was at the forefront of my mind throughout. Am I over stating the obvious/ or barking up the wrong tree here?
My vocabulary is limited I guess. :D
Roflmao @acidyo
I am having a hard time trying to understand everything here. Can one earn with a basic account which has no hive tokens and if you make an investment are you guaranteed to earn.
yes you can, many do.
yes if you power it up/stake, you can earn more hive power through curation rewards and inflation rewards (up to 12% yearly) if you vote on posts that don't get downvoted. It takes 13 weeks to unstake your hivepower back to hive in batches per week.
Currently you can also just trade hive for HBD and if you keep it in the savings portion of your wallet (takes 3 days to remove from there) you can also earn 20% APR on the HBD in monthly payments. This one isn't as set in stone as HP rewards, though and may change based on the block producers deciding on the APR if any.
Thanks so much for the reply and how may I power it up...I am sorry for asking cause I think many people here understand this but I am now trying to learn.... thanks so much for your kindness.
I’m not yet at a point where i’m a major player in the hive network. But as a regular member i do understand that the perfect curation process doesn't exist. You solve something, another problem arises. Even if at a point you think you achieved perfect curation standard then like in a video game the meta would change. I think it is a constant cycle of checks and balances that will contantly evolve over time. One thing for sure, all your efforts are appreciated.
I have delegated to some communities but then I learned that this practice was not correct, so I only keep the delegations to the communities that have developed something. Like me, other beginners can fall into these traps but many of us don't have bad intentions, we are actually trying to learn.
Content like this post is very important as it helps us understand in a deeper way. It would be interesting if there was some community about "good practices" on hive, where the more experienced could expose their knowledge and beginners would have safe sources to learn, although some more technical issues may still leave doubts.
About curation, I had never stopped to think about the real responsibility of a manual curator. In addition to the content he tries to see the creator's effort and this requires time and dedication.
These are complex issues, which sometimes require time to create solutions, which don’t create other problems. I realize many consider it too complicated and posts like this too long to read. But I think they are an important first step: acknowledge problems. Then next step get various perspectives on problem. Then get multiple perspective based solutions.
Everything is a process, which requires motivation to do the hard work of thoroughly analyzing things from multiple perspectives, and incorporating those perspectives into solutions.
Leadership is hard, and it requires both confidence and humility, and motivation, persistence and resilience.
Which are reasons I think so few are good leaders, they possess some, but not all the necessary character elements.
Curation is definitely a full time job!
This post is appreciated, the summary is, we should genuinely curate high-quality content, not for selfish reasons.
That was really long article but very detailed thank you for sharing and I learn something by reading this.
Oh, I'm so far from all this, and I'm even too lazy to understand what and how it works. I just write blog posts.
Then delegations are a good solution for you if you don't wanna focus too much on your voting power!
I'm not old enough to remember bid bots, but it's impossible for people not to see with their own eyes that this is vote selling. I don't know why they are doing this but I hope they will soon realize that it is wrong.
I love this 👆. It's just common sense. It's not hard to see it.
As someone who only tosses his vote button manually this was a delightful read. I also delegate out my HP to projects I think could either use the support, or pay out layer 2 tokens I can easily use with tip.cc for engagement on twitch etc. I know there have been/are a lot of curation circle jerks on HIVE that actually don't really add value to the ecosystem or as you stated: only benefits a select few and doesn't motivate newer users to post whatsoever. I've also been on the sidelines witnessing bloody downvote wars with a plethora of reasons from both sides to the point where it's hard to find the exact truth on the matter. I'm not going to act like I know the solution for curation, as I think it is unlikely there will be a "perfect" system where people can't make some money off of abusing it, but I do believe HIVE has been the best system of it's kind I have seen. Again, just my opinion. Thanks for writing something that genuinely held my attention throughout. Sometimes I just give you a vote without reading knowing it's going to help create some cool things on this chain, but this time I read it all the way through. Well done, I'll have to read you all the way through more often lol. Cheers mate
"Real life" is "unfair" so I think this will always mimic real life eventually no matter what.
a very useful article for us, sir. @acidyo
I like your post and understand what you have written .
But I have a simple question from you if you dont mind?
Why do you sell votes in Steemit?
I don't mind no, after they stole my steempower and many others', they seem to have not taken away a delegation I have there from a person I haven't been in touch with for a while. Instead of letting that go to waste I have a friend doing some vote-selling and whatever else that'll get me some extra Hive. Personally I wouldn't keep a single cent invested there.
I don't consider that ecosystem as anything but a centralized piece of garbage where curation is close to non-existent and only stakeholders receive returns so I don't want my activity there to reflect on the way I see things on Hive, though.
Appreciate comprehensive detailed ideas.
@tipu curate
Upvoted 👌 (Mana: 65/75) Liquid rewards.
Bid-bots always reminded me of 'reward pool rape" and how things got so dirty on platform.
Curation rewards has alwsys a complex subject and nobody ever satisfied. But last few months, I have seen the voting pattern followed by some of the guilds to be very generic, which is kind of 'rape' too where other users whethr old or new remain offsighted.
Delegation is better way to earn reward than self voting. And hope every user deny themselves from self voting and use their power for the welfare of the ecosystem.
Hey @acidyo - what should one do when hivewatchers are looking the other way (ignore my report) & even you gift the account in question (involved in heavy self voting & spam) an upvote?
Are you unaware or it this whole post just smoke and mirrors?
Not wanting to sound rude. I'm just fed up with all the things that go wrong here & nobody seems to care!