...
...
8 years ago in #steemit by rok-sivante (77)
$6,962.58
- Past Payouts $6,962.58
- - Author $6,275.94
- - Curators $686.64
430 votes
- dan: $2273.01
- rainman: $825.17
- itsascam: $800.95
- steemed: $775.40
- wackou: $273.01
- roadscape: $243.91
- witness.svk: $236.72
- complexring: $201.51
- wang: $164.07
- kushed: $162.38
- lafona-miner: $148.28
- recursive: $113.45
- steemroller: $98.58
- steemychicken1: $55.13
- joseph: $48.02
- hipster: $47.78
- liondani: $42.00
- rok-sivante: $36.09
- nanzo-scoop: $28.56
- cob: $19.18
- and 410 more
It's courageous to take the stance of addressing the taboo around downvoting. Indeed downvoting should be used as liberally as upvoting: as a mean to steer the plateform in the right direction.
Another thing that would be even more effective would be to soften the payout algorithm to use a function that grows less fast. Currently, payout growth is quadratic. This is the reason why there is no middle ground between a good payout and a ridiculously excessive payout.
Interesting. Perhaps you or @rok-sivante could add to the comments in my "Minnow's Code of Conduct" post from this morning. I suggested that we (minnows) not use it as an 'I disagree' button but called out my lack of knowledge on the user base's overall consensus.
It being a flag (as opposed to a thumbs down) made me view it as something to be used cautiously.
It's true that the flag is setting some particular context that becomes difficult to ignore afterwards. The choice of using a flag was meant to discourage the type of vote brigading that we find on Reddit. The Bitcoin blocksize debate with wars between /r/btc and /r/bitcoin where opposing views were systematically downvoted into oblivion participated to the creation of echo chambers. We want to avoid this kind of thing happening here, but we may not have to do anything to prevent it because of the economic incentive stake holders have to ensure that the platform remains an enjoyable and user friendly space, which implies that downvoting should be done wisely.
I never used Reddit and wasn't privy to the Bitcoin block size debate, yet I follow. I appreciate the explanation. Down voting has a cost.
However some users will not be motivated by pure economics.
This is true. The assumption is that a user who holds a lot of stake is likely to have either invested (which normally implies some level of understanding of long term economic incentives) or received the stake as a reward for posting good content or curating (which implies that the user is relatively constructive, intelligent, sociable and not a complete troll). Although this isn't exact science and there will certainly be many stakeholders who will use downvoting unwisely in spite of the fact it reflects negatively on their investment. But it is expected (hoped?) that such stakeholders will not be collectively holding a large amount of stake.
"Currently, payout growth is quadratic. This is the reason why there is no middle ground between a good payout and a ridiculously excessive payout."
This is because the only votes that matter are whale votes currently. It's not the algorithm, it's the distribution of SP that's the issue. Obv there could be ways to curb this, but that's not seemingly being addressed. That's the real issue.
That is my hope, but I have similar concerns with you!
Wonderful post! Sorry to hear you were locked out of your account during the hack.
" am I the only one who had higher hopes for this platform to become something game-changing and revolutionary - a socio-economic catalyst transforming the nature of social media"
This. 100 times this. I have been everywhere from beginning of reddit, 9gag, funnyjunk, voat, etc and this is the first time I am so excited about a new one popping up and showing more promise than anything ever has before. Not that I had invested in any of the previous ones, and I doubt most people even had the possibility too. Steemit makes everything possible, and I am 100% that no matter how long it will take for mass adoption, with bigger userbase and more balanced voter-value in time it will all become golden.
Not to mention Steem can do so much more than just being a social platform, it can do what augur (crowdvoting) and any marketplaces and many other apps that are being developed by the Ethereum team.
Usually I liked to compare eth and btc to Apple and Microsoft, now its more like btc being Internet Explorer, eth being firefox and Steem being the beta version of google chrome.
I have been into altcoins for some time, and have been promoting Steemit on my instagram: www.instagram.com/crypt0trader and the userbase is growing there every day too! Would love it if you could take a look at my post: https://steemit.com/steemit/@getssidetracked/the-steemit-community-on-instagram-is-growing
where I warn people about suspicious activity from user: steemit on Instagram, and to make sure not more users get their accounts hacked/phished
Thanks for this blogpost! I also want to take the time to mention not to forget the comment sections of posts! If there is anything I've learned on reddit its that the comments can be a place of originality and most unique stuff you could read, most times leading to them being of more quality than the uploaded content, and that's the real beauty of quality reading!
thanks for the thoughtful comment.
I'll be looking forward to reading more of your input later, especially on the comparisons between Steem & ETH blockchains - a topic I've been curious about. sounds like you may have some interesting insight on this...
Im not sure but I think the drop to 26k was due to the 75% posting rewards payout... or maybe something to do with the price fluctuating.
I agree with you to a certain extent but I think these kinds of posts serve as potential advertisement for mass adoption. I recently convinced a friend of mine to join the platform (once sign ups are open) she's been hustling trying to create a cooking show on Youtube and then leverage that to start a catering business.
Even though she has 45k subscribers she gets paid peanuts. I tried to convince her with my geeky articles, but she only really showed interest when she saw the makeup video and then the cake baking video. She saw where she could offer value.
It's about getting people like her involved that will push the user adoption rate up explosively. I think the whales know this, which is why we're seeing article or videos that can 'advertise' mass adoption so heavily upvoted.
Exactly! People want to see that people like themselves are getting big payouts on Steemit. It's not going to be attractive if people only see nerds shuffling money and paying each other but when they see it's a person like them getting the big payout? That will change everything for crypto.
The problem with crypto has been that only geeks could get Bitcoins. You had to either know how to mine, or know how to write C++, or be a hardcore anarchist or libertarian. In reality most people aren't like that and for every person like us there are probably a hundred or a thousand people who don't have those interests.
When Steemit is successful the most popular posts probably will be posts about stuff ordinary people are interested in. It probably wont be tech related but that doesn't mean it's not making people happy or providing value to people.
yes. different forms of value. alot of users might not personally be into certain content themselves, but highly rewarding certain niche stuff could potentially prove very valuable to different aspects of Steemit's growth...
I think the biggest missing link that many people are not seeing is the 'social value' and the capital of having friends and connections on this platform. Quality comments go equally far as quality posts in connecting with others, which is the REAL value of this network
I've elaborated on my views toward Steem marketing and social capital here: https://steemit.com/value/@spookypooky/posts-on-steemit-aren-t-valuable
Let me know what you think of it, I've seen the discussion pop up in MANY threads and posts over the past days and I think it's a very adequate topic to discuss deeply.
Social capital is exactly what I meant.
I saw Alla post just a bit ago. Good job bringing her on board and I hope she finds success beyond her other ventures here!
We have a clear UX flaw: the same tool is being used for two very different goals:
As a result we have two problems:
This needs to be fixed!
People can vote up or down whatever they wish. They own the Steem Power hence the right to decide where funds should be allocated.
This post inspired me to write on this exact topic. Thanks rok-sivante.
https://steemit.com/steem/@cob/should-one-downvote-flag-the-simplest-guidelines-you-can-imagine
I only downvote something that I think is either plagiarism or a compromised account.
The issue here is that tag-spamming problem - people upvote this in masses and then all top 20 topics are dominated by the same posts. So you need a whole armada to downvote a more or less spammed post and even then the whales have to join. The problem now is that all whales upvote spammed posts - so in general they risk their whole investment as nobody is interested to search for relevant content between some other stuff. It can not be that the same 6 articles what are even top earners are in 18 of top20 topics.... then whole steemit is failed. I even wrote a post that editorial work must be done by whales to protect their investment:
https://steemit.com/money/@hastla/why-whales-and-dolphins-have-to-start-work-for-steemit-or-lose-their-whole-investment
Should I continue to downvote spam comments? The comment ratio on Steemit is very low and when there are comments, it's the same people spamming gifs for pennies.
I think instead of downvoting useless comments, we should UPVOTE good comments. In this way we will get the same result and we wont censor comments.
I agree with you and follow that policy. I don't downvote to take money away from people. I upvote to give money to people. I don't like the strategies which are based around punishing people for success. I would say reward a competitor if there is one.
If you don't like the makeup tutorial then vote for another new person doing something similar so the rewards are spread out. The point is people have to get big rewards and the days when an ordinary person gets a $100,000 reward for a post then this is the best kind of marketing for Steemit possible.
People all over the Internet will see that this happened and rush to join Steemit.
Says the person with a $10k reward on the front page right now. j/k of all the postings I've seen in the last few days yours is one of only a handful I feel genuinely earned it.
Karma works that way I guess.
Perhaps you spoke too soon. Whatever my posts end up getting rewarded my opinion on this is firm and hasn't changed. The subjective theory of value applies to Subjective Proof of Work in my opinion. Valuing content is like trying to put a value on art and I do not think you can have equality of rewards without discouraging talented people.
If this were music for example and we see that certain albums are at the top of the charts even though some other artists put in much more effort, practiced a lot more, and are under appreciated, the only reason we have it where all artists aren't starving is because some have some chance to make it big whether it's fate, luck, the swarm effect, or whatever it is.
What I understand is that on Steemit you only get two payouts ever. The 24 hr payout and the 30 day payout are the only rewards a person can get. While on Youtube or other areas there is a residual income where people produce a piece of content once and can be paid for many years from views. Typically in the content space the popularity translates into the rewards not "quality" which is extremely hard to measure and as quality reaches a certain point then maybe you have all of the trending content being of quality so how do you determine an excessive reward?
$10k for a post is nothing compared to what we can expect to see in the future. I expect we will see $100,000 posts and I'll be very happy for the winner who posted it and for Steemit for making it possible. It might not be considered what most people expect coming from the traditional economy but Steemit is about the Steem Power not the Steem Dollar rewards. As the price of Steem goes up then the only way to get Steem Power for most people will be to earn it and in the process of earning it they could earn a lot of Steem Dollars as a side effect but this will only make Steemit go viral when people see what their posts are really worth.
References
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value
I actually agree with this use-case of downvoting. It's another way for high-value SP members to exercise their ability to curate and influence the site's content.
Since the whales have the most to lose if the quality on Steemit degrades to the point where people start losing interest and leaving, I think it's fair and that they have the right to make these kind of downvotes.
I've definitely seen a fair number of posts earning ridiculous amounts of rewards for the type of content they've added, but overall I think the quality of the trending page's posts has been getting better and that makes me optimistic that the Steemit is improving and on the right track.
i think it's also an honorable approach to take that if you DO downvote/flag anything, to include a comment as to WHY the choice was made - so as to provide feedback for the offending user. that may be a valuable gift that they straighten them self out with in the future.
That's a good point and not one I had considered. I'll definitely be doing this more, explaining why I downvote.
Who are any of us to say what is fair or unfair? And if you knock some make-up tutorial down a peg, does that really benefit you? You feel that your content and other content is more valuable, and I certainly agree that you add valuable content. But when people, many people, vote for something, they do so because they find it valuable. And what is wrong with that?
Having said that, I upvoted this post because it's definitely a conversation that needs to be had.
Have a good day!
We are part of a community which is built upon us having ideas and opinions. That's who we are to say fair or unfair.
I believe if I don't like something I don't vote on it. That steers as well. I down vote on obvious plagiarism and on things that could be deemed offensive (graphic porn gifs, graphic violence gifs) without warning the person and allowing them to opt into seeing it first. Other than that I will not down vote something simply because I disagree with it. Since the FLAG is not next to the up vote. I view it more as a REPORT THIS POST than I do an actual down vote. This is of course my opinion. I don't like liberal use of the down vote as I believe it can lead to circle jerks and people voting down well made comments and posts simply because they don't like the person's thought process. This ruins many channels on reddit IMO. "Don't post in r/politics about X,Y,Z, or the moderators and people will down vote you into non-existence." I can disagree and choose not to vote, or I can disagree and choose to respond and have a civil discussion with the person. Sometimes I'll up vote people I disagree with just for being civil and having a discussion with me and making me think. YOU WON'T LEARN MUCH BY ONLY TALKING TO PEOPLE THAT ALREADY AGREE WITH YOU. You learn the most by having GOOD discussions with people who you may disagree with.
If I don't like post, I don't read it. That's all. Thee's no need to downvote. If it's written by some disgusting hater, hardly it'll get many votes. I've never downvoted (maybe accidentally clicked this flag)
Thanks for this post and perspectives, this is such a valuable discussion to have in our environment and really look forward to see how healthy things will become in relation to the upvoting as well as the downvoting business... I have the feeling it will dictate the healthy of our Steemland. More to come in the near future. Namaste :)
Here is a relevant post https://steemit.com/steem/@jl777/truth-and-fairness-vs-popularity-what-to-do-when-a-post-that-says-another-post-is-wrong-and-gets-more-reward-than-the-original
which was downvoted by the author of the second post which does seem unfair to me
I'm just getting started here with Steemit and glad I was finally able to find a post like this. This platform has enormous potential and I was very surprised at how poor some of this content is and the absurd payouts some people are receiving. Almost everything with big payouts is platitudes to Steemit. I get it guys, Steemit is cool...but can someone post some quality/unique content?
But here's my take, and let's hope for the sake of the platform (and humanity) that this is just Steemit getting its legs. Like those who were fortunate enough to come across Bitcoin in the early days, the early adopters of Steemit are enjoying an unforeseen and exponential upside relative to the value they are creating. This is bringing new users to the platform, and hopefully will attract some very talented people who contribute to a better platform. I'm optimistic - and hopefully we won't have to use the downvote feature much longer as people will just gloss over the nonsense without even voting.
My curation criteria is here: https://steemit.com/dana-edwards/@dana-edwards/my-criteria-for-curating-posts-on-steemit
I don't downvote just because I disagree with the content. I do not downvote if the content makes obscene amounts of money. I let the market decide the value of every post and I respect the decisions of the market.
If a post is abusive, or if it violates human rights for example, then I'll downvote. Don't threaten to harm others or initiate clear abuse or violence and I more than likely will not downvote the post even if I don't understand why other people value it so much.
This is frankly beginning to get to me as well. I have put hours of research and writing and proofreading and produced a few posts; two were moderate successes in their day, but the three last ones were failures.
It is not even the fact that they were failures that bothers me.
Here is a post a little over three paragraphs long. About being sucked in, having no self control, and letting an addiction take over - it ended up being worth $6700.
I wrote my take on that behavior pattern, why it is not beneficial, and how it can be overcome. It draws on years of personal experience and reflections; the prose, I would like to think, is vastly more expressive than the couple of paragraphs without formatting that compose the other post.
It was deemed to be worth $428.
Complaining about the problem with reckless abandon, no formatting and no solution ? $6700.
A thoughtful, dare I say well written solution to said problem? $428.
I realize how this sounds, and I will not let it stop me from writing (for the time being), but either there is clearly a problem with the way rewards are being distributed, or - perhaps unexpectedly - the shallow formulas that work in the larger society will also find success here, if steemit is but a microcosm of the larger system.
Can confirm this is a thing. My post hit top of front page, was at about $8k. Couple hours before payout got like 20 downvotes for no apparent reason, downvoters didn't even comment. Payout went down over $500. Reduces rewards for everyone, including comments. Not cool!
"While we've been advised to save down-votes for spam and abusive content"
To be honest I think this can only work with very-low value accounts. I hate to downvote spam because I'm wasting 2-3-5 cents that could be used to reward someone. If my account vote was worth like 0.0001$ that would be different than 0.02-0.05$. And if you are a whale, I guess a -500$ upvote for spam or not-critically-abusive stuff is not an option and you are kind of forced to leave it for other people.
As it stands now, maybe such an approach would be ok. However I think the ideal solution I expect the developers to pursue is for the allocation algorithm itself to cleanly handle this kind of thing, where after a certain point increased votes lead to diminishing marginal returns so that the disparity becomes less extreme.
That's the beauty here on Steemit.You can choose which post to upvote or downvote, nobody is telling you to do that. Who is using wisefully they're votes will have more to win on long term.
I don't have much Steem Power,so I can't upvote everyone like someone else is doing,I choose you because I really enjoyed what you are writing and is very helpfully.
I hope one day to make posts like you do... and when I leave your post I feel like I learn something. That's the real purpose.
You simply cannot please everyone. If its not for you, move along. Thats how I feel anyway. I doubt I ever down vote anything. Why be negative.
@rok-sivante Great write up! As @wingz mentioned the drop from 32k to 26K might be caused by the price fluctuating and not only downvotes.
I'm not heavily invested as you are. In fact, I've only discovered Steem several days before but 26k for a simple make-up video makes me question the reasoning of people who voted.
As I understand, a number of whales must upvote to accumulate such huge amount. They might try to justify the vote as and attempt to expose Steemit to a wider audience, specifically, women. But is it truly the best you can think of as an investor? By now the make-up tutorial has roughly 1.6k views... 1.6k views for friggin 26k? It's $16 per view. And I can guarantee, the video won't magically become viral overnight and gather additional 100 000 000. That being said, I have nothing against the make-up girl (she's lovely), I question the whales action for upvoting content that represents Steemit.
Fuck, Steemit has so much more potential than becoming another Youtube make-up channel or TMZ. We could literally finance independent journalists, send them to Rio to cover issues that Brazil's government don't want to talk about. Steemit could finance documentary creators... "Sponsored by Steemit" in opening credits. How does that sound? Steemit, as a brand, should be that cool guy in a bar, who always tells stories, you won't hear from anyone else.
In my opinion, if you produce original, captivating content, you capture people's attention. If you have people's attention, you become valuable. Whales, who upvoted, should ask themselves. Is make-up video tutorial a ground-breaking piece of content?
perhaps, in a way it was, as it was truly marketed as the first in a potentially significant niche - and it was done well. is was a success story of its own, though not something that's gonna happen every day...
Then throw a few hundred bucks her way. MAYBE a grand. Then maybe do the same for a bunch of other girls if they make content too. Just don't do something ridiculous like pay a brand new youtuber with no following a year's salary.
I think this is a really interesting post - that demonstrates the different viewpoints of what Steemit is all about.
Personally I would fall into your camp, of an interest experiment and platform, that would offer a social network which rewards content-creator rather than a some group of shareholder.
There are however many here, you see the social media platform as being totally subservient to Steem and Steempower as an invest. This people tend to advocate the pumping of 'sensationalist' content in an effort to quickly broaden appeal and drive the price of Steem higher.
Interesting how all this is going to play out in the community. I think the founders are more in the middle, and I've heard there are plans to reconfigure the payout system to try and strike a balance between 'viral' content and more long-form content.
Nice post keep it up i was planning to create but good that u created it :)
upvoted it
Yes it is cool.
I think it's reasonable to expect that at this stage there will be a lot of volatility and disproportionate payouts.
Compare it to the securities market. If there is little liquidity (few buyers and sellers), one trade can have a significant impact on the price of an asset. Same here, as there is still little content compared to Reddit or YouTube, certain content will attract a disproportionate amount of votes.
I think this will even out over time as more users will join, and other platforms with similar models start to appear.
i think a lot of people just look at others and upvote top posts. Taras crap-post is a good example. There is a simple guide here on Steemit How to be a populat - just born with boobs and pussy. it is a pity.
votes are love
but some people believe are better than others in the community
really i don't know why 8]
spammers aside
Great post and explanation of down voting. Do what you feel is right for you!
if you down-vote someones post just because you in your infinite wisdom think they are earning to much, you are just a hater, an envious bitch. as if the money is coming from some shared treasury. Its not your money!!! you are stealing from people with no gain for yourself its stupid and evil
You're not stealing something they don't have yet. You are participating in the community deciding what something is worth, and this is vital. If you only upvote you're only doing half your job.
i upvote the post i like
i down vote offensive material racism, hate, etc
if an article i have no interest in is making a lot money ill leave them alone good for them , but down voting them because of my personal opinion no that's wrong.
and yes you are taking from them the power of the votes they received justly
and i define my job i dont work for any of you.
Great post, brave analysis , in a true democracy the right to say "No" can't be forbidden, enough with the "happy flower power everything is good" avoiding vendetta down votes is what Find tricky to grant given the impossibility of hidden anonymous down votes.
good
So far, I've really only down voted chesters or abusive posts, I hadn't considered the down voting trends, you're giving me a lot to chew on haha.
I have to say that I agree that it's hard to identify when to down vote sometimes. For example, check out this gem of a conversation that I did not down vote because I believe the OP was being genuine, even though I can't stomach his line of thinking: https://steemit.com/homosexuality/@miguel12/the-cause-of-homosexuality
So I've determined how I'm going to respond to genuine OP's who's views I disagree with, but now I have to consider trending topics. This Steem addiction isn't easy
I guess if's it fake for sure or in bad taste.
What a refreshing post! I totally agree with you that the rewards should be fair and not excessive at all.
But due to the very nature of creative writing, it is difficult to gauge just how valuable something is. What I am trying to ask is....how do we determine at what point something becomes too excessively rewarded. Is a $10,000 reward on an original content more excessive, or is $11,000 reward on an analysis of something more excessive?
These are matters that will get solved automatically in as the platform matures and the users "settle in".
I have no concept of excessive. It's whatever the market says it's worth. If a post gets $100,000 and it's just a piece of art work which looks like paint thrown on a canvas then that is what the community views the value of that art at that time.
The question is whether or not it's ethical to interfere with the market in this instance? I don't think it's ethical to interfere. I don't understand why people are obsessed with Sneakers or with Pokemon Go but I do understand people value it a lot and would probably vote these topics up a lot. I wouldn't vote it down just because I don't want some other person to make money and I don't understand the attitude of blocking others from making "too much money".
To the girl with the makeup tutorial, I'm happy for her. Same for the African guy who made enough money to get out of poverty. These are success stories of the Steem platform and do more to market Steem than anything else.
Yeah, you are right! is sth is receiving value, then it means that the community deems it as valuable! good point! :))
Take a look at this video:
She is one of the most successful Youtubers alive today. Most male nerds probably will not understand how or why she gets millions of views and is a millionaire from just Youtube. If she posted here she'd probably be trending daily and people wouldn't understand why.
But the insight is, maybe it doesn't or shouldn't matter to us why someone is trending other than a lot of people like them or what they do? She is the kind of superstar poster who would bring Steemit to mainstream audiences.
That's the thing, though, your vote is only one out of many, and you help to determine what the market will bear in this regard. Don't like sneakers and Pokemon Go you should indicate this with your voice. Just my opinion.
I do, by indicating what I like more than Pokemon Go and Sneakers. This way the people who like Sneakers and Pokemon Go don't have their voices suppressed by my disagreement on the value of their preferences.
This was the info I was looking for when I was writing my post for the minnows this morning!
https://steemit.com/steemit/@jsteck/minnow-code-of-conduct-how-one-minnow-would-like-to-see-the-rest-of-the-school-behave
in my opinion its fair to pull down only when you fell angry when you read,
just because you disagree with author's opinion, dont need tu pull down.
Happy to see you expressing this as it needs to be heard. I was deeply disappointed in the performance of my post explaining why I shot that video but reading your last few posts is getting me excited about producing valuable content again. And of course if I keep seeing stupid shit at the top I'll make more ridiculous video parodys, no let's be honest mockery of that crap!
So this question may be slightly unrelated...but does the value going down on a post mean that people have downvoted it?! Because my posts always seem to go down after a little while, and the votes don't seem to be. I'm new to this. So I appreciate this article and all the other info. Thanks!
But i dont see any "downvote" botton, only upvote, how is downvoting even possible?
He means flagging.
good luck..
Thanks for sharing I wait for your next post
I think this is brilliant!
Similar to SP, SMD tokens cannot be purchased directly on an external exchange. SMD are primarily earned through contributing but can be purchased by converting STEEM tokens to SMD tokens.
Actually Steem Dollars can now purchased on external exchanges !
https://poloniex.com/exchange#btc_sbd
https://bittrex.com/Market/Index?MarketName=BTC-SBD
PS Abbreviation of SBD = Steem Backed Dollars
or just SD = Steem Dollars (not SMD please edit)
In my opinion a social media today, not only to share information and update our daily life activity, but also as a platform to branding our offline work or as an ecommerce like online shop etc
I totally agree with you, as an investor myself i don't see yet the potential in steemit as a long term investment. People are only posting things that will generate a lot of likes and money but they are not posting really useful stuff. Getting rewarded thousands of dollars for a blog post on your holidays or some make up tutorial is not sustainable in the long term and i predict the collapse of this platform or a drastic change to come.
When this platform went online i thought we would see incredible content that you can't find anywhere else, like the post i did on futures contracts. But my post got only 2cts in rewards. This doesn't make any sense.