Sure, but "bad whales" and a trending page that looks set in stone are great demotivators and two initiatives are not enough as of now, in my opinion.
IMHO there's not so much cognitive dissonance but communication failure..
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I am curious how it counteracts the problem also.... We've seen 100+ votes and $5. It's how we make a difference, not do we want to make a difference
this is at 135 and 20$ :)
I see people with under 100 at 200$. Stll, for me comments are also important. A lot fo comments means something...
And yes, this is just another nail in the coffin that nobody acknowledges.
Maybe if we shout loud enough for long enough...if not, oh well, our throat get horse and problem solved too right? :)
maybe the upcoming update will set more balance into voting power distribution..
mainly the entire problem is created by the fact that the minnow votes are not valued. I feel the same as you actually. I sometimes get 300+ votes and a payout of like say, $76 and a shitload of comments. I am thinking to myself, "How the fuck can this be?" And I have quite a reach and a large amount of followers too. I am frustrated that my influence does not carry more weight with regards to the payout. And this is caused by the fact that the minnows are not valued, not heard and do not feel loved. This is a huge problem. If bots are ruining the chances that minnows are not feeling valued, it's time to reduce the bots or have some kind of rules regarding the bots.......we cannot place robots and people in the same category! Humans deserve more value!
I've often heard that the reason minnows' vote weight is not more is because people would abuse the system by having their bots upvote their posts.
it's at $32.53 now
Comments I love also.... A good discussion thread and I feel rewarded..... I just don't care for the discrepancy... In theory lol
What do you think about giving minnows a fix rate voting power like 2$ every vote. Considering the no. of minnows like me in the community, a hundred votes could mean something and can make a difference. We wont be needing the whales votes anymore.
Isn't it amazing?
@stellabelle Thank you for taking the time to answer! I know this is one of your concerns but for me, there isn't primarily a MONEY concern. But it becomes one when I see the trending and what crazy amount other people do. that's what fucks us up!
Is this post worth 77$? is it worth 700$? It's hard for me to say but what IS fucked is that if ned upvoted [ which I frankly don't understand why comment and not upvote unless your comment is negative ] it would have been at 200$+.
THAT'S what mindfucks.
That being said, the idea of the council wouldn't be to give people more "money per upvote" but to give them a voice. A voice is more important in the long run.
"it's time to reduce the bots or have some kind of rules regarding the bots" <-- this is also difficult to do, because once you start with rules, you\re gonna have more rules and more bans, and etc. The bots don't belong to SteemitHQ, not can they ban them. We need solutions that take in account that bots WILL exist and upvote. But I must agree that the human curation is >>> autos.
And I also agree that bots are ruining big time for everybody, maybe not for the authors who get 1000$+ every time they say "hey".
I"'ve often heard that the reason minnows' vote weight is not more is because people would abuse the system by having their bots upvote their posts." -- I invite you to read this, that's the main reason why the votes have the power they have (+ Steemt marketcap )
How does a bad whales looks like @razvanelulmarine and what do they usually do?