I'm new to steemit. I've written several articles on different topics but I'm still learning how to do things here. I've been told to get on steemit Chat, but I haven't had time to do that, yet.
The first thing I'd like to ask about is this. Just now, I found an article (it's not important which, or who wrote it) that was, for the most part, a retread of an article published in a journal. The steemit user basically, as I understand it from his own comments, digested the journal article and rewrote it his own way, and then added how he feels it ties in to steemit. I independently found the source of his article (which he had referenced in his article, too). On the one hand, I feel the article is very important but, on the other hand, I'm not sure how valuable regurgitating someone else's work should be. For myself, I prefer to create original content, but everyone has their own preferences and I am loath to say others aren't supposed to be rewriting other people's work. Much that is written in the word is merely the act of researching, digesting, synthesizing, and then presenting things, so who am I to poo-poo the world of academia? Nobody at all. It has value - well, some of what academia produces, at least! There are good and bad academicians, just as in any other profession. How do other steemers feel about this behavior of rewriting someone else's published works?
The next thing I'm confused about is that, when I first looked at the article, it had a value approaching $50. When I left it to write this, it had dropped to about $20. I noticed that some people had commented that they had downvoted the article - not because they thought it was crap, plagiarism or any other worthy reason, but because they thought it had been inappropriately voted on. I found that confusing, and I also thought it was somehow wrong that money could be taken away in this manner. People spend hours or days preparing their work and, because someone is jealous or feels there has been a whale who blessed an article too much, they attack like a school of piranhas - that seems, to me, to be a dangerous way that "cliques" can attack each other. Then, I noticed that people pointed out that the ratio of votes to views was way out of whack. Indeed, when I left the article, it had 344 votes but only 74 views!
On FB, it's common for someone to say "This person's my friend, so I'll press like" even if they haven't read something, or they just like the title. With pictures, it's an easy thing to do. And you feel good, because you made your friend feel good - but did you really do something good? I don't believe so. Just being supportive without being critical is, to me, a source of major problems. So, when I see a ratio that is THAT out of whack, I have to question: What the heck happened? Is this people just spreading dopamine by upvoting a TITLE or a MEMBER? Are people blindly upvoting because they are minnows helping each otherin an effort to help each other get more money without being concerned with the quality of what was produced? What is really happening here? I find the idea that the reasons for those upvotes are NOT because of the quality of the contribution, but because of something that defeats the very purpose of upvoting and represents a threat to the steemit cryptocurrency's stability very concerning.
I don't randomly upvote or downvote. I won't upvote someone just because I like them - if they produce crap, I'll usually ignore it, or I might give feedback to try and help - but not to be malicious, despite claims to the contrary. I believe that is the way all steemers/steemians should be behaving, for the benefit of every member of this site.
So, can someone please explain how the ratio of upvotes to views can be so terrible?
I also was baffled because I noticed something strange on my own posts. 2 days ago, I posted a little game for people to wrap their brains around. So far, 6 views have been counted yet 52 people have voted. In the drop-down list of voters, they are all upvotes. No one has commented. Yet, the value of the article is only $.03. I really don't understand how that can be possible, unless the voters I cannot see downvoted me for reasons unknown to me.
Another message I posted on the same day in response to another user's article about Snowden netted a whopping 3 comments and 17 views, but has received 245 votes (again, no downvotes are seen in the drop-down), and has a value of $13.77.
Is there something wrong with the views counter? Can articles be viewed without being counted? Are people just taking pity on me? How come the value doesn't make sense compared to either the number of views or votes?
I would really like to understand these issues. I appreciate any constructive feedback that others can share with me, as well, because I'd like to be one of those users who helps make steemit a better place. :)
If you appreciate this article, please 🏅upvote/like👍
, 🤩resteem/share
and share it to Facebook
, Twitter
, Reddit
, LinkedIn
and wherever else
you can!
You have many interesting questions brought up and I want to answer one of them because I think it is the most important: The views counter isn't always accurate. Of course it is true that a post is often upvoted by people or bots who haven't read it but there are also possibilities to read an article without being counted as a view. :)
Thanks for responding! How do you view an article without it being counted?
I think that someone who uses Tor Browser which is more common for people who use Cryptocurrencies shouldn't be counted as a viewer. At least if he deactivates all Scripts. :)
Shouldn't be, or isn't? Is this your opinion and, if so, why should those seeking anonymity/safety be penalized. If it is a fact, also why, other than that deactivating will potentially prevent counters from working correctly?
One part of the anonymity of Tor is that view counters are avoided. I had known that this happens on Youtube, Blogger or Wordpress but after I wrote my last post I tried it on Steemit and I think I'm right.
But I think the point personz raised that views through esteem and busy aren't counted is more important in numbers than Tor users.
If steemit can't accurately count the number of views, is this because of a flaw with the program, or is there just no good way to count views?
I have no reason to believe the view counter is off. If you think it is you should raise it as an issue on the GitHub page.
Down votes have the indirect effect of increasing the potential amount other posts can be awarded in a given day because there is a finite reward pool per day. Some whales see it as their duty to keep things "fair" by reducing the rewards on so-called over rewarded posts. This practice is quite contentious, though perfectly defensible by the fact that each user is free to up or down vote as they please.
To clear up a few things:
Thanks for taking the time to respond - I really appreciate it! You've made a lot of things clear to me! :)
How does one downvote? I don't even see this option. Do I need a higher reputation before that is available?
Yeah, same @geocurt. I think you're supposed to go to their profile page and flag their content? That's what I do (I did this once because someone just blatantly copy-pasted two of their articles from news sites).