TOP 80 effective Steemit сurators that encourage discussion for the 2017.10.19

I want to share with you statistics about the most effective Steemit curators.

This statistic is not about how much the authors or curators have earned. This statistics shows the list of curators, whose contribution to the reward pool distribution is the most significant.

image source

---

What does this mean?

You can say that there is nothing interesting in this statistics. That it is clear that the reward pool is distributed by whales. But!

The most interesting thing is how the curator distributes the reward pool. He can vote only for his posts and his comments. He can vote for a selected circle of authors and affiliated accounts. But also he can vote for a large number of authors who publish interesting content.

Thus, an effective curator is a curator who has sufficient Steem Power (he can be an investor or a popular author who has earned his Steem Power by publishing interesting content), devoting time and effort to the content curating at Steemit and distributing a reward pool in favor of the authors. And the efficiency level is estimated by how much SBD curator distributes among as many authors as possible.

But this time we will review those curators who reward the discussions, that is, they vote for the comments of other users.

According to the ideology of the Steemit creators, the discussion is as valuable an element as the author's content. Confirmation of this is the allocation of a separate pool of awards for comments.

---

How it works?

Votes - Each curator distributes a certain part of the reward pool with his votes (upvote / flag).

Authors - This part of the pool he distributes between a certain number of authors.

VAS (vote average strength) - For general awareness, we can estimate the average vote strength in percents (%), with which the curator votes.

Contr. (SBD) (Contribution in SBD) - The distributed part of the pool is the contribution of the curator, it is calculated in SBD. In this case, the author's reward is taken into account. The curator's reward is not taken into account.

Share % - The percentage of the of the curator contribution among the contributions of all curators, we can also estimate for information purposes in %.

Eff. - The effectiveness of the curator is estimated in conventional units and is calculated as follows.

The total number of authors who published rewarded comments for the period under study is determined.
Then the contribution of the curator is divided by the total number of authors, and then multiplied by the number of authors for whom the curator voted for the period.

Thus, we see that, having distributed even a smaller number of SBD between a larger number of authors, the curator can be more effective than other curators. At the same time, having a greater voice power, but not actively voting, supporting a small number of authors, the curator takes a lower position in the rating.

And now, statistics.

---

3725 authors published their rewarded comments during this day.

4293 accounts participated in the comments curating according to information from the database.

20015 votes were made during this day.

1772,61 SBD - is the total author rewards for this day.

---

Given the number of curators supporting the comments and influencing their reward, I decided to reduce the number of curators in this toplist.

TOP-80 effective comments curators for October 19, 2017 (24 Hours period)

№	Account	Votes	Authors	VAS(%)	Contr. (SBD)	Share %	Eff.
1	@good-karma	251	194	0	61,72	3,48	3,21
2	@pharesim	114	80	0	28,75	1,62	0,62
3	@gentlebot	59	57	100	37	2,09	0,57
4	@thing-2	57	51	100	35,55	2,01	0,49
5	@acidyo	51	34	1	27,46	1,55	0,25
6	@surpassinggoogle	42	27	2	32,17	1,81	0,23
7	@xpilar	209	30	2	14,8	0,83	0,12
8	@esteemapp	238	187	1	2,38	0,13	0,12
9	@apink	32	16	32	23,35	1,32	0,1
10	@alexbeyman	37	23	51	16,96	0,96	0,1
11	@bitcoiner	210	174	1	2,1	0,12	0,1
12	@exyle	36	33	3	10,06	0,57	0,09
13	@feruz	248	190	1	1,69	0,1	0,09
14	@papa-pepper	61	51	9	5,31	0,3	0,07
15	@rivalhw	40	33	7	8,3	0,47	0,07
16	@kus-knee	28	28	6	6,54	0,37	0,05
17	@lukestokes	19	15	6	8,77	0,49	0,04
18	@canadian-coconut	10	10	3	11,79	0,67	0,03
19	@lordoftruth	19	16	8	6,79	0,38	0,03
20	@the-alien	10	6	100	16,66	0,94	0,03
21	@awgbibb	23	21	10	5,29	0,3	0,03
22	@lichtblick	34	30	4	3,22	0,18	0,03
23	@steevc	84	69	3	1,67	0,09	0,03
24	@adm	188	1	2	125,1	7,06	0,03
25	@juliank	37	31	1	4,13	0,23	0,03
26	@reddust	41	33	10	3,1	0,17	0,03
27	@greenman	9	6	42	17,25	0,97	0,03
28	@mattclarke	23	14	26	8,25	0,47	0,03
29	@stellabelle	8	8	9	7,43	0,42	0,02
30	@maryfavour	16	7	23	8,19	0,46	0,02
31	@daveks	58	49	1	1,72	0,1	0,02
32	@cnts	32	21	21	4,13	0,23	0,02
33	@quinneaker	17	10	27	8,47	0,48	0,02
34	@ats-david	9	9	3	8,9	0,5	0,02
35	@extrospect	5	1	100	55,96	3,16	0,02
36	@bleujay	13	11	15	5,81	0,33	0,02
37	@lyndsaybowes	21	14	8	4,23	0,24	0,02
38	@jaki01	10	9	11	6,52	0,37	0,02
39	@ulfr	20	12	37	6,03	0,34	0,02
40	@derrick829	25	3	59	23,63	1,33	0,02
41	@enki	15	13	2	1,89	0,11	0,01
42	@lexiconical	7	6	27	6,78	0,38	0,01
43	@nanzo-scoop	8	8	6	5,32	0,3	0,01
44	@timcliff	11	11	12	4,54	0,26	0,01
45	@geneeverett	35	17	91	1,69	0,1	0,01
46	@rynow	27	17	5	1,36	0,08	0,01
47	@followbtcnews	22	21	11	1,24	0,07	0,01
48	@ericvancewalton	8	6	100	3,94	0,22	0,01
49	@whalecurry	10	4	100	8,83	0,5	0,01
50	@dougkarr	11	8	91	2,6	0,15	0,01
51	@onealfa	9	7	18	4,73	0,27	0,01
52	@doitvoluntarily	17	16	31	2,66	0,15	0,01
53	@kaylinart	12	10	7	4,01	0,23	0,01
54	@surfermarly	8	8	33	2,4	0,14	0,01
55	@guyverckw	26	11	20	2,21	0,12	0,01
56	@overkillcoin	30	19	8	1,42	0,08	0,01
57	@talanhorne	10	10	50	2,29	0,13	0,01
58	@crypt0	5	5	52	7,98	0,45	0,01
59	@inertia	3	3	100	6,61	0,37	0,01
60	@czechglobalhosts	6	6	10	6,58	0,37	0,01
61	@abh12345	36	32	7	0,84	0,05	0,01
62	@sandrino	5	1	100	28,18	1,59	0,01
63	@apolymask	17	11	94	2,4	0,14	0,01
64	@meesterboom	34	24	3	1,65	0,09	0,01
65	@flameburst	8	2	94	11,81	0,67	0,01
66	@goldmatters	4	3	100	6,87	0,39	0,01
67	@dennisschroeder	18	5	100	7,18	0,41	0,01
68	@tetsuo	7	5	44	4,76	0,27	0,01
69	@cryptopassion	14	14	1	1,94	0,11	0,01
70	@bitcoincompany	7	2	100	16,31	0,92	0,01
71	@driva	13	13	28	1,55	0,09	0,01
72	@jasonrussell	17	17	100	2,7	0,15	0,01
73	@zer0hedge	9	7	75	5,03	0,28	0,01
74	@tumutanzi	8	4	1	5,19	0,29	0,01
75	@onetin84	17	13	41	2,67	0,15	0,01
76	@teamsteem	11	10	1	4,92	0,28	0,01
77	@floridasnail	16	7	39	7,6	0,43	0,01
78	@enomujjass	14	11	8	1,82	0,1	0,01
79	@ace108	7	6	22	6,5	0,37	0,01
80	@oflyhigh	6	5	15	5,51	0,31	0,01

---

Now you know all these heroes. Their daily work increases the interest in the discussion, gives hope to some authors, and some even a decent income. Their work attracts new authors in Steemit and makes existing users remain.

---

Information sources

All information is prepared by querying data from a SteemSQL - SQL database containing information from Steem's blockchain, as well as by calculations based on this data.

Special thanks to @arcange for SteemSQL and for the advice provided to me during the development of this project.