What if you upvote practically every post as it comes out. Then you check back 23 hours later and remove your upvote from all except the few that made $. How do they combat this to ensure you don't walk away with huge Curation Rewards? (I'm assuming they do somehow). Do they:
- Not let you upvote that many?
- Not let you retract that many upvotes?
- Not let you retract upvotes after a short amount of time?
- Easily flag this sort of activity though some analysis?
- Do they make the retract of an upvote not take away the dilution of having upvoted it in the first place?
- Some other method I haven't thought of here?
This is meant to get conversations going. Even if this has been 100% solved it's still good for people to come together and discuss how and why it works the way it does..or how it could work differently. Disclaimer: I'm basically 100% in Steem Power for the long run. Also, fun fact.. with 2600ish Steem Power it looks like I'm making about 14 Steem Power per day on interest!!! That's over 1% every 2 days which means Steem Power looks like it pays back faster than inflation (I'm guessing because not everyone has their Steem in Steem Power.. so a higher proportion of the inflation payoff goes to those who are essentially Staking in Steem Power?) Happy Steeming!
I've thought of the game theory implications** of voting/unvoting: https://steemit.com/steemit/@alexgr/curation-gamed-through-unvoting
So Smooth commented on it and said that unvoting doesn't return voting power, so in that regard, there is no gaming. (But this prevents people to remove erroneous upvotes as they are penalized by the non-return of voting power).
** Flagging with reputation impact didn't exist, so the fake content copy/pasters are now penalized in this way.
I've thought of this too. Have you tried it? I have unvoted and seen my voting power returned. I'm pretty sure.
Obviously it shouldn't be returned, but I saw what I saw.
I just upvoted your comment and then removed my vote.
Here is the result:
87.86% prior to upvoting you
87.42% after upvoting you
87.41% after removing my vote (I lost even more for unvoting!)
Perhaps what you saw is the natural increase in voting points?
Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Weird, I wonder what I saw.
Thank you for the information! On topic of discouraging people from taking advantage of the system, is it right for me to flag someone who I see posting "good post" or whatever useless responses on dozens of peoples posts in short order? I want to ensure I'm not wrongly flagging.
The low quality comment spamming is interesting. I'm not personally tempted to do it.. whether out of honor or it just isn't practical anyways to be a troll longterm.. but it definitely seems like a viable angle that should have some sort of counter-measure.
Throwing your flag is one way, but it seems imperfect because it isn't that there's something flag-worthy in that particular post. And plus you don't necessarily want to take one for the team and use your curating on stuff like that.
I think the reputation feature needs to expand. I'm actually not really sure at all how it works currently. I've thought that there should be some way to rate "quality" of posts (I guess I mean comments more than blog posts, but either). Like whether or not you want to use your curation power on a post, you can select how good you think it is.
If it's a 1-10 sort of thing, the algorithm should probably factor in the rater's tendencies and how often they select 10 (or else the game theory is to always pick 1 or 10 to maximize your influence). Even a 'constructive' vs. 'useless' would address what you're talking about .. 1-10 would do more to sort out excellence.
I guess a less complicated idea is additional flags, for comment spam and maybe also for plagiarism. And it just shows up next to that person's name for a certain amount of time or whatever when they're flagged by enough people for it.
If he is spamming with such zero-value posts, and you don't mind wasting your voting power, sure.
That seems to make the most sense--voting power not returned.
This is a curation guide by dantheman
https://steemit.com/steem/@dantheman/how-to-maximize-curation-rewards
This one talks about the algo penalty
https://steemit.com/steem/@abit/new-curation-reward-algorithm-huge-penalty-to-early-voters
Both talk about how properly curating reduces bots and penalties, so there is kind-of built in moderation to eliminate trickery, but nothing targeting the scenario you mentioned above.
I go by these "golden rules" of curating. Just started curating (been authoring for a month) so we shall see how that all works out!
Your steem voting power would go down and your vote would not count. You can check this at www.steemd.com/@username
Thank you! How did I not know about steemd.com? That's awesome!
Me too. I convert everything to STEEM and then POWER UP for my STEEM POWER.
Would love to hear your thoughts on:
Are you are buying gold/silver/bitcoin/crypto this year, if so, which ones?
Followed and upvoted.
Hopefully some of the steemit veteran know how folks blast in some comments on this cause I'm curious to the answer, if there is one.
I don't know the answers to your questions, but I am interested in hearing them.
Interesting observations. I would love to hear about this.