I was recently asked in discord about posting frequency and what is accepted by the community, something that is a hard question to answer, but especially relevant after Hardfork 21/22 that encouraged more downvoting. This article isn't suggesting a particular number and there are no hard rules at all, but instead will raise some points for consideration and perhaps some discussion.
Let's get into it.
Payouts
The first and foremost consideration on the Steem blockchain is generally the post payouts, as they come from what is considered a shared pool of finite resources and as such, there is an opportunity cost involved. One STEEM going to account A means that account B can't have that Steem. Because there are quite large differences in support levels across authors for many reasons, it is likely that an account that gets a lot of support will likely be expected to post less, than one that gets little.
Again, this is not a hard rule and it is up to voters to decide if they support or not, but if for example, a person has a large vote and used it solely on themselves and their alt accounts ten times a day, it would likely be met with downvotes sooner or later. The reason is that while some selfvoting is accepted, most take the stance that this is a community that encourages sharing and distribution of STEEM to those who deserve it.
Quality
Next we can talk about quality of content and this is closely related to the payout above. For example, if a person was getting highly voted on 10 selfies a day, it would likely be met with downvotes. And, there are many people who would say that a random picture of lunch is not worth large voting support at all. However, remember that a professional photographer could spend many hours creating a single picture, but the quality level is likely to be different.
The real question in regards to frequency and quality is whether an individual can actually deliver something of value multiple times a day without the standards dropping significantly. Quality is subjective in many ways of course, but in general one likely has a sense of what the quality of something is in relation to what surrounds it. And, it is pretty obvious when someone is posting low-quality content.
Spamming
The third thing to consider is the audience and what someone is willing to put up with in terms of frequency without annoying them and having them tune-out, mute or unfollow. I know that if I am consistently seeing what I consider low-quality and irrelevant posts by an individual coming through my feed, I will choose to ignore them or unfollow, as it doesn't add anything to my consumption value, so I am not going to vote on it anyway.
When people are consistently posting near-automated posts from applications that do not add much value to others, it is generally seen as farming. While not everyone may hold this view, many with stake do believe that in order to get a vote, a post has to add something of value to the community or, on average the posting account adds value to the community. Some people like myself who do get significant support, tend not to "shitpost" as we are going to get automated votes on them regardless.
Autovote abuse
The reason people have automated is generally based on the quality and consistency of past posting behavior, where some have decided to support "sight unseen" as they trust the content creator to deliver. However, there are many people who have been able to get voting support and then suddenly, their posting behavior changes and increases to take advantage of the votes. This is seen as greed and will often be met with downvoting if it continues. There have been many cases of this kind of abuse, but it is up to the voter to remove the vote from them or, up to the community to remove the value if they do not think it deserves it.
The blurry line
As you can see, pretty much all of these things are going to be treated in a subjective manner unique to any individual in the community. This means that the reaction to various behaviors are going to vary also. While some people will see someone posting a lot and just mute them, another will choose to downvote the value away, especially if it is low-quality and easy to output content.
There is no bright line on how many posts is too many in a day and I would like to say that people should use common sense, but I know that it is asking too much. Often greed sets in if getting rewarded and the urge to post more is too strong. While for others, they think that posting more is a way to get attention, without considering that what it is actually doing is turning people away from taking it seriously.
This is an attention economy and while many people are competing for viewership and vote value, it is up to each content creator to make their decisions on what is likely going to work for them. However, there are consequences to decisions made that can range from people turning away and ignoring content to people downvoting heavily - everyone is free to decide how they act here, but it doesn't come without reactions from others.
The community future
However, things are changing. For Steem to really go mainstream it requires participation from all kinds of people, posting all kinds of content. What this means is that the space is evolving into being more accepting of variation in all of the things I have mentioned thus far.
The coming Community functionality and Smart Media Token (SMT) powered experiences, will allow for a much greater range of posting behavior from a single account as content can be placed into specific content buckets that are tailored for narrow communities. This means that a post like this one that is general and likely relevant to many, could be followed up with a random question posted in a very small community without it attracting the attention of my entire audience.
Content separation through Communities on the Steem blockchain, could be visualized in a similar way to posting on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, Snapchat and TikTok, without having to have multiple accounts. While each platform is differentiated by some kind of content type, the Steem blockchain is "content agnostic", meaning it can deliver all equally.
This has been part of the problem in the past as high-end articles that take many hours to create, are positioned with selfies, some of which earn a great deal more. With one shared pool of STEEM resources where there is competition for the contents, this creates friction and conflict and raises all of the questions of the points mentioned above, and likely many more I have skipped and missed.
Expanding resources
However, the Steem inflation pool has changed and is changing more, as there isn't just one pool anymore, there are many. The tokenization layers possible on Steem means that there are now dozens of inflation pools distributing concurrently, and once SMTs are released, this range will grow even faster. This means that there can be many resources, with many of them holding economic value.
And, that means that content creators are no longer tied to earning just from Steem holder votes, the can earn from multiple token holders, across multiple pools. This means that the posting frequency is likely to go up for many people, especially since there can be communities that are created exclusively for narrow types of content and are rewarded from a layer token.
Clear as mud?
As I said, this post wasn't about giving a definitive answer on posting frequency, but rather provide points to consider. It is up to you as a content creator to decide how often you post, but remember that it is up to the individuals in the audience to decide whether they think it is too often, overvalued or spam.
While there is no one rule, what people have to consider are the unspoken rules of any community and the individuals within, who look at behaviors and judge whether they are generative of value or harmful to the value of the community itself. While it is your prerogative to decide your actions, as is it theirs.
In my personal opinion, there are very few people who can consistently post multiple times per day and still deliver something of value to the community without diluting their quality. What I have found is that hose who try eventually either burning themselves out or, burning the audience who's attention they are trying to grab and eventually, they fall silent.
Perhaps a very general rule of thumb could be;
if you are only posting it for a payout, it probably isn't worth it.
But, that is my own opinion as a content creator who has managed to consistently produce multiple times daily, for three years straight. So, while no authority, I do have experience on Steem.
For some the lines are clear.
Taraz
[ a Steem original ]
For me, it more comes down to sustainability. My own underlying goal per week is just 2 to 3 posts. If I end up creating more or less it’s not a big deal. I could post a little more each week I choose not to most of the time focusing on other things.
Far too many people seem to force posting daily or even more. In the long run, you often see those kinds of people fall off into the void after they become burned out. They ended up creating themselves a grind in needing to feed the never-ending desire for daily content. It’s an easy trap to fall into. Can they do that for five, ten, or even just a year? Most times not.
I also find the actual time spent on writing content to be just a fraction of the time involved with it. You have whatever experience that went into being able to make a post around it. Along with time spent promoting, maintaining, engaging, organizing, and so many other things. That right there ends up being the frequency limiter and can tie-in with how people view a piece of content as well.
Yep, I agree. It has to be natural and unforced. What many don't seem to consider is that when they force it for a payout, it often comes through in how they write.
My dad was an artist, a painter. While he would spend between 150-400 hours on any single painting, the real investment was developing the skill and experience to be able to do what he did - that took a lifetime.
What I find these days is that many people grow up on the internet and have relatively limited life experience, which of course limits content range.
@enjar you have received
30 ENGAGEfrom @tarazkp!View and trade the tokens on Steem Engine.
!ENGAGE 30
Ain't this the motherfucking truth!
I think if you are really true to yourself, you know what is worth posting and how often.
Yeah, it isn't too hard in my opinion and yes, there is some room for fun occasionally too :)
Most definitely, the occasional shitpost only brightens up the feed 😝
8 8You guys are great but so is everyone else reading this thread. Okay, not everyone, not the abusers of #steem. They're shit.
Peace and love!
Peace and Love.
Very well, and most succinctly said, and on that note I won't bother commenting myself!
!ENGAGE 30
Have a
!BEER
too.
Happy to voice my opinion on behalf of you too! :)
@eveuncovered you have received
30 ENGAGEfrom @revisesociology!View and trade the tokens on Steem Engine.
View or trade
BEER.Hey @eveuncovered, here is a little bit of
BEERfrom @revisesociology for you. Enjoy it!Learn how to earn FREE BEER each day by staking.
It is bloody hard what you do and very few if any can keep up with your numbers. It has taken me some time as I am comfortable with 2 a day and anymore would dilute all three to some degree. There is an interesting post anywhere, you just have to look. The trick is finding the topic though and you have it down pat.
Yep- I think when it comes to sports posts, you are doing really well :)
Thank you. I actually enjoy it which is probably the answer to your post on adding value and post frequency. If you are posting just to post then maybe you shouldn't be posting.
Precisely.
!ENGAGE 20
@cryptoandcoffee you have received
20 ENGAGEfrom @tarazkp!View and trade the tokens on Steem Engine.
Well Done Folks! We have successfully drained @flysky's DV mana.
I am sure he likes to play again. So please keep the energy level up and keep the blockchain alive! Thank you all for playing!!
:D :D
Well, I guess he can keep going - but it will cost him.
Hurray 😁
I think tomorrow’s data will show an uplift in engagement too.
RIP @flysky DV mana!
Nice! See how nice the comments look, after pest control finish work.
@flysky, feel free to downvote this comment!
Haha, I've seen a phenomenon I've coined the steemyoda effect. Once an account such as steemyoda favors you with autovotes, your posting frequency increases, and your quality drops significantly. Steemyoda drops his autovote and the posting frequency subsequently drops. I won't call anyone out besides @steemyoda, but examples are pretty easy to find.
Yeah - I get some visits from that account too - I haven't changed. But then, I have found that the more support I get, I lower my posting frequency. Back in 2017 I was posting between 30 and 40 articles a week (it was a very time consuming process as each would still average 1000 words-ish. However, I started to get some @blocktrades support (not every post as he votes manually) so dropped down to 12-15 posts a week. I felt both lazy and like I had a great deal more to say and add - but, I consciously constrained myself.
Some people don't seem to have any kind of conscience in this regard, as long as they can maximize their rewards. I see it as short-term win with long-term blindness. The account getting all that value now, will never have my support in the future as it has signaled a behavior pattern that I do not appreciate in any way.
!ENGAGE 20
@joshman you have received
20 ENGAGEfrom @tarazkp!View and trade the tokens on Steem Engine.
One thing (one thing of many but this is the biggest thing) I have not yet understood why some people would think: "Because I once got payd well in Steem, I am supposed to get that same amount now that I then did. Because it's what I deserve."
None of us actually deserve any of the Steem here because we once got something. Those who have worked / do work hard, do deserve and do get more, but no matter how long someone has been here, how many quality posts they have done, how hard they have worked for that, how good luck they had or how high Steem has been, that can all change. Investing large amounts of your own money is different than working hard and getting a steady income. Steem isn't steady so why does it still come such a big shock to some people that they no longer for some reason do not get as much as they used to? So they change their behavior in posting. Because they may think that they deserve more. Although so many others also get less here.
A touch or greed with the selfish thoughts of I deserve more (than others).
The use of common sense really is too much to ask. And if you in any of the several cases in life find yourself explaining what in that particular case would be within reason, you always realize that if you have to explain it, the person you explain it to, probably won't get it anyway. Why something is okay sometimes but not always and where is the fluctuating, invisible line.
"Nothing I say can change that persons mind." At least that's how I see things. Of course it's not that black and white. So if I sometimes encounter someone who is on the edge of realizing what is common sense, I give them a little push by saying the obvious: "If it was someone else doing this what you want to do, would you be okay with it and tolerate it? If not, there's your line."
But as you implied, not everyone gets it. Here in Steem several people may be okay with them and other people posting whatever, all the time, several times a day because they don't actually go and see how the blockchain looks like. They only see if they got what they think they deserve. And if they didn't they blame other people here. "Why you not upvote my posts?" "Why that one got that but I didn't?" "You all upvote wrong!"
Hallelujah!
Exactly what you said and couldn't concur more and my thoughts and and and. Yes. It's a good thing. Although I like the messy blockchain on it's own too.
The sense of entitlement runs strong in the world these days, even more online as there can be the impression of competence given without needing a reality. Most people including myself are unlikely to be able to compete with professionals with our content, but that is not the point of steem, it is about being able to offer to the community directly.
When it comes to the earning levels, many people do not understand that 100 dollars worth of Steem at 5 dollars is only 20 steem, and they used to get a 100 dollars on a post, so why aren't they now, even though 100 dollars worth is 500 steem. Many do not know how the pool works and, aren't willing to learn.
There are the ebbs and flows in all things, some people handle them better than others.
Thanks for the good comment!
!ENGAGE 50
And people over ideas. I before we. I believe that topic has been many times here too. Conveniently it fits well together with entitlement.
@insaneworks you have received
50 ENGAGEfrom @tarazkp!View and trade the tokens on Steem Engine.
Posting Tweetrency
One of the things I have always hated the most is the author who gets on an autovote from a large staked user or two who then goes from one or two posts a day to 5 plus. Some of them go so far as to hit 10. It's disgusting almost
Have these voters note noticed the 'max votes per day function' on autovoter?
Originally, there was no such thing and it was one post, one vote. Mindhunter was raping the johal vote a lot and updated his profile to something like "the highest earning Steemian" :D
He earned a huge amount at one point!!!
Yeah, it was insane =)
until it was pointed out and ended quick smart.
He took it relatively well. He always was a chancer!
and @meesterboom - johal's delegated to ocdb now, I've never come across mindhunter.
What counts as a 'serious whale account' has changed quite a lot too in recent times I think.
Just wait until the ATH ;D
It has. Quite a few sprung up out of nowhere after tha last hardfork!
It's seriously like they haven't or they have decided to just reap the curation and don't care. I can think of one recent example but it's a common thing throughout the ages!!
Yep. I think one current individual who has done so is earning the most on steem at the moment. Remember Mindhunter? He did similar and started writing like he was on LSD :)
Actually I am not sure what to do with that particular individual, if you have any idea please let me know.
I am not sure either, but he is definitely milking it heavily yet doesn't seem to feel any social shame of any kind in it. It is quite strange really.
Lol
Posted using Partiko iOS
It was bizarre.
Posting frequency is a hard thing to figure out, I am glad that I gave up trying to figure it out. Winter for me is a slow time, spring when picture taking takes off again, (which is almost here), and I do not have to freeze my toes off, I expect I will be back to 3 or 4 post a week, until then it is as the mood strikes. But the down side of that is no posting you lose those few voting trails that have hit you. It always amazes me the quality and number some people can put out a day, so for me it is easy to see why they get such nice payouts, but equally amazing is the single picture often blurry 10 times a day poster that gets some good payouts, they were going away for a while, now seem like they are coming back, The tiny price rise already seems to be having an effect.
I think for many people, they should post a bit more. More are far too conscious of what they are posting that they take the fun out of the experience. Sure, there are some who are a little too loose too :D
Lol yeah, it is pretty funny isn't it? Asher and I were talking about this the other day.
I'm having trouble grasping your moral theory on this one.
If a street musician makes huge tips, should they stop playing as frequently?
If a street musician gets tips from the same person automatically, regardless of what they play, should they stop playing as frequently?
Here's another example,
If a retailer makes a lot of money, should they close their doors in order to give the other, smaller retailers a chance, and by doing so force their own customers to find alternative stores to buy their daily supplies?
If these "winners" do "take a break", is it virtually guaranteed that the "other" less popular options will "get a boost"?
Please explain.
Ever stayed and watched a successful Street musician? They clear the tips out frequently, but leave a little bit in there to show they have got some support for social proof. Not too much though, as they don't want he audience to think they have already earned enough.
With your other examples, they don't have an open wallet and the immediate earnings aren't visible to the customer at time of purchase. They are a false equivalence.
And, I took no moral stance as far as I recall, I gave my opinion after observing behaviors and processes. I will leave the moralizing up to you.
I'm not sure your rush-to-disqualify is valid.
Everybody knows the "artists" on the radio make more money than your local garage band. They don't need a "public wallet" in order for anyone to reasonably draw such a conclusion.
Everybody knows the "global-super-store" makes more money than your local mom-and-pop sole proprietorship. Nobody needs to see a "public wallet" in order for anyone to reasonably draw such a conclusion.
Your entire post revolves around "fairness" and "quality" and "abuse".
Heck your opening sentence is explicitly about "community standards" (ethics).
These are all clearly ethical/moral/normative concepts.
I'm not trying to "put words in your mouth", I'm just trying to understand, if I distill the essence of your post, how do your core principles apply to a non-steem, real-world economy.
Should every millionaire hollywood hack script-writer and low-effort singer/producer/performer do more to "give back" to "the community"? Should we boycott radio and television shows that are syndicated or re-released on DVD and or streaming because they're "not original enough"?
Drawing conclusions and watching the money tick over are two different influences on behavior. Not seeing it directly distances it from the viewer with actions not getting an immediate feedback loop in the eyeline. I can buy a mobile game for 2 dollars, and not see the app company's billion dollar revenue tick over.
As said, I presented points after observation of process and behavior on Steem and from a community perspective. Interestingly, one of the people who were abusing an autovote lost that autovote recently, likely for that abuse. While that person can do as they please, so can the voter and if that voter feels that they are being taken advantage of in a way they do not appreciate, they will move on.
It is a consumer decision. There is no (long-term) supply without demand and the consumer is the one who demands. Consumers can be fickle, and while some say "take all I can while I can" and burn their audience, another will find ways to evolve and offer value to that audience to maintain them long-term as tey can offer some kind of trade that gives the sense of a win-win.
Ok, you seem obnoxiously reasonable.
Let me just ask you one more thing,
Do you think people should be downvoted into oblivion by larger accounts, simply for posting "low-effort" content like "word of the day"?
Can you email this to my wife? :D
It depends. If they are doing it ten times a day, Selfvoting each and farming Steem, probably. If it is a once a day kind of thing, I don't see the issue with it. I think intention matters.
I would also say that the value of the post would matter to all kinds of sized accounts too. If someone was getting 30 dollars on these posts, I would suspect it would be getting some downvotes, but a dollar or two (from the community) and no one would mind. When it comes to low-effort content, if many people think it is value adding, that is what it is. However, that changes when someone (especially with a large vote) believes their own content is valuable consistently.
At the end of the day, I think that while imperfect, the Steem voting up/down system is somewhat more honest than the hidden algorithms that platforms use to manipulate rewards for some over others.
I will add:
When it comes to freedom of speech concerns, downvotes have nothing to do with it as there are plenty of interfaces that will show it regardless and it doesn't remove it from the blockchain. Freedom of speech doesn't mean that a person should also be able to earn on what they say.
Let's just say, hypothetically, that the Chinese Censorship Brigade decided they wanted to create an account (or buy an existing account) with (a relatively small) 2 million steem-power and start obliterating any accounts they didn't like (anything not written in Chinese).
Now imagine they managed to get their account up to (82) rep, and then power-stomped your blog (@tarazkp) into (-11) rep so ALL of your posts were automatically hidden behind some sort of vague warning message (strongly suggesting you're an unscrupulous person).
Would you be, you know, "totally ok with that", since "there are plenty of interfaces that will show it regardless" and nobody "deserves" to make a few steem-pennies off their blog if a whale decides to ambush you?
Who would you complain to? Or would you just go somewhere else?
I usually advise people against posting daily unless they have a backlog or are confident in their abilities to not burn out but most of the people I've given this sort of advice to have been artists and while there are quite a few of the more disciplined and/or professional ones that can do daily sketchies and exercises and things, a lot of us have trouble just posting once a week never mind more than that XD
Um, this common sense thing you bring up sometimes. What is it? XD
Yeah, it depends on what one can and wants to offer. What I am hoping is that through communities the people who are unable to really get something "of quality" out often, will have many other ways to get different types of content out. I really do think that posting is valuable for an individual - and it isn't the payout.
I don't have much my self--- wait til you see the house ;D
!ENGAGE 20
@ryivhnn you have received
20 ENGAGEfrom @tarazkp!View and trade the tokens on Steem Engine.
2 and half years in, I still have no idea what's the acceptable number of posting. Sometimes I spam the chain posting 3 posts/day but then I stopped posting for a week or two.
Do as you feel and take any good in the same vein as any bad consequences. It is interesting how many get upset at "unfair downvoting", but they don't seem to have any such issue with any "unfair upvotes" they get. =)
What Eve said!
Spot on.
Yep. not so hard.
Yeah....this is all So true.... my rewards dropped to almost zero... so I was needing to post 10 times a day just to make a buck. Even with 6200 Steem power .... I messed up. No way back now. Oh well. I made a huge mistake and sent 3 Steem to upmewhale like I see others doing and got downvoted to zero. What a mess.
Once labelled a spammer, it can be hard to come back (far from impossible though) as some kind of trust has been broken. Post HF, vote-buying was targeted due to the ridiculous nature of it.
Hope you are well here now.
Not sure. I used to get some decent upvotes... but that's disappeared. I guess I need to take a good long break from Steem for a while. I was gearing up to Promote like crazy on Twitter.
That is not the only mistake you made, you actually sided with and tried to defend one of the terrible pest of steemit, @flysky
I am fairly certain you did that without knowing as well, but you know terrible mistakes add up :)
Well... I asked a question about what was going on. I did not know the History of all these flagging wars going on. So yeah ... I guess I am just collateral Damage. This place is pretty unforgiving. How do I remove this blemish from my Record ?
@flysky is a seemingly, highly confused person.
Yeah ... for some reason he was giving me lots of fair sized upvotes so I thought he was a good guy. I made a big mistake of asking why he was being flagged and I guess that was the end of me.
I don't even know who he was until he started downvoting me for three months straight. Still don't really know who he is, and he is still downvoting :) This is Steem, it is filled with all kinds.
That is brutal. I wish we could all just get along over here. This does not bode well for the Future of Steem I am afraid .... So many vandettas... everywhere ... It's crazy.
nop, that's not the end of you :) You should focus on your content. Write 1500-2000 word posts ;)
!ENGAGE 20
Ok... I will try that then. Thanks for the advice.... and for the Engage tokens.
Here is a Fresh start. Let me know what you think.
https://steemit.com/busy/@offgridlife/digital-painting-with-apple-pencil-on-ipad-pro
A Digital Painting (video) Demonstration ....
@offgridlife you have received
20 ENGAGEfrom @azircon!View and trade the tokens on Steem Engine.
I got caught in the Cross fire between the Biggest Whales on Steemit and for that I am screwed. I am just a simple Artist, photographer, filmmaker trying to spread the Good News about Steem ...... oh well...
Now @flysky will start downvote with @xboxguru account. That's a tiny one, and that's drained too. Now I think they will drain their UV mana.
Oh I forgot. He will ask his retarded brother to join in the fun.
Doby.... doby..... where are you???
Yeah, it is ridiculous. Keeps doubling down on being a douche.
Seems like the high quality social media platforms all have some sort of posting and commenting frequency to maintain their value.
They also filter out through algorithms what gets seen. For example, A facebook account with 1000 friends will only se a couple hundred updates if that, even though there might be 5000 possible bits that could fill the feed.
Congratulations @tarazkp!
Your post was mentioned in the Steem Hit Parade in the following category:
I agree this is a tough question, as some are more suited to the task of daily posting then others and depending what your posts are and the inventory of drawings, photographs or essays you have in physical locations or in your head.
I write in bursts, about ideas or questions or things related to ideas, questions or tangents. So depending on my job workload and the content of the articles I read my brain may put out more the 3 posts a day, but in general I stop at three per day, although I have been known to go over that number when a significant number of great ideas, events or questions caught my eye. I think I stop at three because beyond that I worry I might be accused of farming. But I feel comfortable exceeding 3 when I think I have valuable content.
Add to that, that I love to write and since I started out almost two years ago with sometimes zero votes on my posts for months, so I feel like the people people who vote on my posts think I add value, and I like to think they look forward to my posts each day, as I look forward to reading posts of the people I follow, so that is a partial incentive to write.
I think my other personal incentive to write is that it is how I learn and process all the new information I read each day. I like to take a concept which is new and write about it, as if I was explaining something to some one, like a teacher would because I think that when you really understand something you can explain it to someone else. Plus I feel great when I write a good article explaining the great things about cryptocurrency and especially like Steem because I think the both of them have the potential to help people a lot through reading, writing, educating ourselves and possibly enriching ourselves.
I guess those reasons for why I write explain why I sometimes write so many posts. I like writing. It’s good for my brain. And when I am on vacation and don’t post for a day or two, or swamped at work and don’t post it’s okay because posting is something I do as an enjoyment which I make time for not to grind out posts.
I have arrived at this mindset, I didn’t start with it.
@tarazkp's top sponsors,
@steemyoda (-3) bid-bot, @ocdb, @likwid, @theycallmedan, @stevoperon (25) no posts no comments, @intrepidphotos, @azircon...
But mostly @steemyoda (more that 3x any other individual sponsor)
IMAGE SOURCE
Yeah, funny isn't it?
Edit: by the way, what has this got to do with anything?
It relates to "community standards" (and who deserves what and why). Accounts have been getting stomped (downvoted) for using bid-bots, and while you're probably not soliciting their services yourself, I'm just wondering if your bid-bot upvotes are getting canceled (by huge downvotes), or is it just the small-fish that suffer the consequences of our vigilante "protectors".
They are not bid-bot upvotes. They are completely unsolicited. They are also organic it seems as they seem to be placed randomly on my posts.
Since the EIP, buying votes has been heavily and publicly frowned upon and is a major reason that the fork happened to begin with, to discourage vote buying.
The reason that I don't get downvoted for it is that every single one of the votes I receive is an owner with stake opting into voting for me. Big and small, and a likely reason they do so is that they see some value n what I do, and trust that I am going to keep doing it.
I have had some of the largest whales on the platform downvote me for weeks at a time, I have had two orcas downvote me consistently for the last 3 months. I am no stranger to getting downvoted, nor to controversy, but the difference likely is that I don't bitch about it, I suck it up and do my thing as I have always done.
Earnings aren't guaranteed on Steem, but with a couple SP, anyone can post.
That's what I've been told repeatedly, but only the small fish seem to be getting punished for it.
For example,
https://steemit.com/dtube/@cyberdemon531/kbhmlueor4f#@logiczombie/q5ls0q
other than them transferring everything out to binance, I don't see any transfers to buy votes. rocky1 has upvoted me occasionally in the last few months too, I think when high on VP.
If you want to know, you'd have to go through the accounts of the voters and see f there are any sends from other accounts buying for this one. However, last week someone bought me a vote from somewhere too, so that isn't foolproof either.
The last purchased vote I could find for @steemyoda was on page 9, about 30 days ago.
Business seems to have slowed after https://steemit.com/you/@steemsidious/we-must-wipe-out-steemyoda
It looks like @steemyoda is voting on the top-earners (band-wagon-voting) in order to maximize their curation rewards.
IMAGE SOURCE
probably. would make sense since with downvotes, vote-selling doesn't give as good rewards.
I'm glad you were able to "weather the storm".
A lot of others haven't been that lucky.