It works until the platform blows up, that's the whole problem :)
You just have to realize that 0% self-voting and actively curation already nets you 10-20% ROI per year. That's insanelyyyyy high and has to be overcome by continous new investors in STEEM. When people are selfvoting for 100% ROI per year, there have to be pretty much 5 or 10 times as much money coming in to keep the price equal.
Also the more people self-vote, the less authors are earning and the less value the platform has for potential future investors. You need to look at the whole picture. It's quite complicated. But one thing is simple, nothing good will ever come from selfishness :)
I like your point! I've been here for something more than two months; I believe I'm doing ok, but I honestly sometimes feel I'm wasting my time....thinking about buying steems to increase my SP a bit, but it's impossible to reach more than few cents most of the time.
When I see those dolphins and whales sometimes I feel like they are the only ones getting all the cake.
As a content creator you need to work really really hard for at least 6 months to get in the top 10% popularity it seems. But that's a different problem, that has to do with the amount of below average content people have to go through.
Then why is "auto-vote" this post written in? It is (or was) the default when writing a post.
I take it you've never read 'the virtue of selfishness" and how alturism is evil?
How is self voting any worse than having a bot do it for you? OR having multiple accounts and having them vote for you?
Nobody is refuting that they're all just as bad :)
how is self voting any different than any other kind of voting?
perhaps no one should vote at all?
think of the poor rewards pool!
Because with self-voting you only take away from the platform, when you vote on others there's at least a chance they feel valued enough to stay, promote steemit because of their positive experience and maybe even invest. Every single cent you vote on yourself is lowering the value of the platform indirectly.
You also don't know what the true value of your content is when you vote up yourself, because you influenced it.
every single cent I vote PERIOD is the lowering the value of the platform directly...as well as every vote YOU make or anyone makes.
you can't have it both ways.
and once again..BOTS..bots can't read, they can't evaluate, they have NO CLUE what something is worth.
yet they vote....more often than people.
bot voting is an order of magnitude worse of a 'drain' than self voting..
Nope, if the bot votes on others it's fine.
The reward pool isn't the value of the platform. The quality of the content and how appropriately it is rewarded is where the value of the platform comes from. There's 100's of thousands of Dollars that can be spread out better to the content creators. $100,000 worth of self-votes is a good place to start reallocating those rewards to people that make the platform valuable.
Nope, if the bot votes on others it's fine.
.
The reward pool isn't the value of the platform. The quality of the content and how appropriately it is rewarded is where the value of the platform comes from.
how does a robot determine the quality of the comment when
a...it doesn't even read the post (no view)
b...it is incapable of judging quality to begin with.
These questions are answered in the Steem whitepaper.
oh? The whitepaper has been up dated to take into considerations hard forks 1 thru 19?
The white paper deals extensively with the question of self voting.
why was upvote included as the default option (from day one) on the editor?