This. I mean, we talked about that 3 times the last weeks on discord, but if you need to hear it a fourth time:
Don't treat the rewards you can give as your property, you are not giving out tips, you are assigning rewards from the shared pool to people who bring value to this platform. The value in it lies in a diverse span of content from hundreds of authors. Don't vote for the same people you made friends with all the time.
There are a lot of services which can help you to achieve this if you're not interested in digging: c-squared, curie, helpie, steemstem, curangel, just to name a few.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
In a round about way you are bullying people into using your service, you downvote them and the first thing you do is tell them they can delegate to you and all their worries go away, in fact you literally almost said that exact thing to me previously. Either play by your rules or deal with downvotes every day, your choice.
Setting that aside... what number is "good enough" for you? I have already stopped voting for slow, old, widsom, cryptopassion and a few others... If you look at my top 30 votes on any post you will see that I have only ever voted for a handful of those people. So a handful out of 30 is vote trading? I didn't make any deals with these people, I just voted for what I liked and some of them happened to vote me back, which is basically what is happening with the vast majority of accounts on here! Yet you to continue to downvote me every day regardless.
How about a couple witnesses that post just about every single day, some multiple times per day and get upvotes from mostly the same people every day? Ye they aren't being downvoted... and don't forget they are also collecting 334 steem per day as a witness, which amounts to 2,338 steem per week... them earning high amounts on random posts every day sounds like double dipping to me, at the very least.
My service is an offer (for free), I really don't mind if you use it, I don't get anything out of it. I also mentioned a lot of others.
You have (at least) 10 votes per day, worth $2 each. The last 7 days you gave those to 28 people. The last month to 50. These numbers show me that you don't care for the bigger community. So why should that community reward you?
But I thought it was about POB? Why should someone's voting activity dictate one way or another what a post is worth? That seems to contradict itself.... pretty mightily actually.
It may because vote trading and vote selling (which are equivalent) is damaging to the game theory behind PoB as has been explained in posts many, many times going back three years.
So it comes down to value. If someone is doing damage to PoB then they may not be contributing on net, even if their posts are otherwise okay, and rewards should follow value contribution, or they are a waste of money.
That, I guess, is the logic behind curangel and others prioritizing these downvotes, but that is up to them as with any stakeholder deciding how to use their votes.
That makes sense, though they don't seem to define what exactly vote trading is. If you vote for someone and they in turn vote for you later on despite any kind of agreement or anything of the sort, does that constitute vote trading? And for those that have traded votes, at what level does it become damaging? Many on here tend to vote for content they like, people they like, and people that vote for them, all somewhat normal social behavior. My question to those groups has always been at what point does it become a "downvotabe offense"? I'd just like to see some guidelines that are enforced community wide...
They're entitled to their opinion on what is vote trading, what is adding value, etc.
There won't be any, other than perhaps what emerges over time as a result of stakeholder voting behavior (but could also change over time). There is no such enforcement mechanism other than voting itself.