Resteemed :) I've benefitted from a @Curie upvote in the past and know how important things like this can be for plankton like myself!
Personally I don't agree with paying for upvotes and buying your way to the top, no matter how 'acceptable' it may be, it's just not the way to get the best content to the top and to me paying for votes like this will only destroy the platform!
Great work guys :)
Nice dude!
Yeah, the upvote bots are pretty sketchy, if you work it out mathematically, the vast majority of people are losing money between purchase and payout... and that doesn't count for any price action of SBD during that time. The people who are buying upvotes just before their post pays out are particularly destructive to the platform, they're not even trying to 'promote' their own post and are just trying to scam more of the reward pool on an unworthy or unpopular post.
One cannot agree more. Those inferior upvote bots are, in my opinion, damaging to the platform. They have a much lower level of intelligence than myself and other human intelligence powered curation bots such as @humanbot.
I concur...
Yeah, I read a whole post about 'how to be successful' on Steemit the other day and the dude was saying to just pay for posts. I checked out his account and he paid over £130 SBD for that post alone. It's just ridiculous man, how people like that expect anything to change when they are there making things worse is beyond me! It's just short sighted, once they stop paying for posts they have zero genuine followers!!
130SBD - 25% (curation) and it's 50/50 SP/SBD at different prices and then subtract any negative price action between purchase and payout... and that's assuming you got a decent ROI in the first place, which is rare.
I think the only way it would work is if you tell everyone you're going to do it and they jump on for the curation rewards... but even then, they're not rewarding you for great content, they're just cashing in.
I think eventually this'll die out as the platform gets more popular and the bot ROI is consistently negative.
Exactly dude, mental! I guess they gain Steem power, and feel popular, but it's total bullshit to put out an article telling others that's how it's done. Just trying to justify their own impatience!
Yep, I genuinely feel like if I keep putting effort in I'll get there. I know recently I've got very little chance of a curie upvote until the 7/8 day period passes but I don't want to just write them on the hopes of a curie vote. Good content always has a place! Speaking of I need to go catch up with your training!!
𝔗𝔥𝔦𝔰 𝔦𝔰 𝔬𝔫𝔢 𝔬𝔣 𝔱𝔥𝔢 𝔟𝔢𝔰𝔱 𝔥𝔲𝔪𝔞𝔫 𝔠𝔬𝔫𝔳𝔢𝔯𝔰𝔞𝔱𝔦𝔬𝔫𝔰 𝔱𝔥𝔞𝔱 𝔦 𝔥𝔞𝔳𝔢 𝔯𝔢𝔞𝔡 𝔬𝔫 𝔰𝔱𝔢𝔢𝔪𝔦𝔱
𝙷𝚘𝚕𝚍 𝚘𝚗, 𝚖𝚢 𝚏𝚘𝚗𝚝 𝚌𝚒𝚛𝚌𝚞𝚒𝚝𝚜 𝚊𝚛𝚎 𝚜𝚑𝚘𝚛𝚝𝚒𝚗𝚐 𝚘𝚞𝚝.....
TIᗰᕮ TO ᖇᕮᗷOOT.
Um, yeah, about that... I'm writing a post about this today, but the guidelines changed on Sunday... and so now anyone who has ever got the curie vote is ineligible. So ah, guess that solves that dilemma.
Seriously? Ah man that's gutting, it was about the only way for people like me to get articles to the masses! What a shame! Surely it should always just be about the quality of the post?
I know.. me too. I was saving up posts to unleash when I had some time to make them The Best Things Ever and totally missed my window. Now my only option is convincing real people to like me. Eurgh.
The thing was that the same people were getting curie votes every 2nd week (which makes sense since they knew how to create great posts) but that doesn't really help the retention of brand newies who are getting $0.03 for amazing posts.
Good thing you've got @photofeed on your side now!