Who's Full of Shit and Who Rocks?
There is one awesome thing about blockchain and that is data.
The more data people have the better we can see who is helping the platform and who is just blowing smoke up our asses.
I found a new data site thanks to @maverickinvictus
The important one in my opinion as it shows actual outgoing help to the users on the platform
Users are even ranked based on what they give and not only their size
The site that does this is http://steemocean.com
Created by @ura-soul - There are a witness for Steem
Vote for them here
https://steemconnect.com/sign/account-witness-vote?witness=ura-soul&approve=1
This site shows and ranks users by out going votes and self-votes, together
So who is really giving more without shoving their hands into their pockets all day?
I am really not surprised one of my favorite top twenty witnesses are ranked #4 @pharesim is awesome and doesn't post much but look how much he gives because he loves this platform, have you voted for him?
Granted you have to look at all the data and see how many out going votes the account gives
What is your rank?
I am ranked top voter #188 out of all voters and I am a minnow
It is based on voting and not wallet size
I'm not doing bad for a .33 vote in 7 days of voting
You can make a great difference
Are you doing your part?
Are those leading communities, claiming to be for the group doing their part
Research and get your score better
Simplified Data of top 10's
Well, for the record: Pharesim's votes are mostly done with automation. He has his votes set at a low percentage to follow a lot of other users.
I think the main metrics to look at would be vote value and self-vote value. (Including "self-votes" on secondary accounts.)
As I explained in the lengthy comment in this thread, originally the algorithm gave more weight to the number of accounts voted for than it does to wallet size.. but since only wallet size can't be 'gamed' I had to adjust it to give more weight to wallet size again. Currently ranchorelaxo is 6th and only votes for 6 accounts - it is his huge vote payout that has him in the top positions - I will adjust the algorithms now to adjust slightly more towards number of accounts voted for.
In the future I would like to make this much more complex and look for patterns in voting, such that a more accurate result is produced ... But I only have so much time in the day and my 3D printer hasn't arrived yet that I intend to use to print a cloning machine so that I can work more days.. ;)
Some other are paying out just as much on under 40 accounts, just keep the data fair and it should help everyone in the end. The rank is not the only important number shown on the list as is.
Yes, the rank is a work in progress and is based on subjective opinion to some extent - the other data on the site is not subjective though and can be used however people choose.
If there is enough room maybe you can add in delegated out and in SP for each account. See who is spreading their own stakes as well as using someone else's and subtract out votes to the delegator of SP from each.
I don't know the work involved, but I think it would be a nice addition.
That type of thing could be a good addition if done carefully, yes. The algorithm currently takes about 5 hours to run each day, so I have some space to play with to add extra calculations but anything that is recursive will quickly add huge overhead into the calculations. Checking one level deep for delegation might not be too bad, but it can always be 'gamed' if people really care about hiding their tracks.
Always, but a step forward, in any case, is a big plus. Thank you for all you do.
You are welcome!
@ erodedthoughts shutup you nazi fag child raper phedo sicko bully fuck off from my blog you sick sorry of a man
keep downvoting my blogs for your sick entertainment.
stop stalking me go molest your own children or your neighbours you sick fuck
leave me alone you cunt stop stalking me and downvoting my posts
@ erodedthoughts shutup you nazi fag child raper phedo sicko bully fuck off from my blog you sick sorry of a man
keep downvoting my blogs for your sick entertainment.
stop stalking me go molest your own children or your neighbours you sick fuck
leave me alone you cunt stop stalking me and downvoting my posts
@ erodedthoughts shutup you nazi fag child raper phedo sicko bully fuck off from my blog you sick sorry of a man
keep downvoting my blogs for your sick entertainment.
stop stalking me go molest your own children or your neighbours you sick fuck
leave me alone you cunt stop stalking me and downvoting my posts
Of course, I said look at all the data. Any witness willing to follow a bunch of minnow voters is a win. Imagine how much more the minnows would grow if the top two hundred accounts did micro votes behind small user votes. Most won't because that is less self-voting for their accounts.
If the only purpose to voting was to "grow minnows," then I supposed this would be a good idea. But minnow account growth isn't really the goal for a lot of users. In fact, I think that's entirely the wrong focus for a social media platform - and it's one that has created a lot of unintended consequences around here with misguided hard forks. Too much energy is being wasted on "how much more money can non-invested users make?" instead of "how can we create a better user experience?" or "how can we make Steem more attractive for investors and businesses?"
I get the desire to "help the little guy," but this is a DPoS platform, not simply a mechanism for distributing a UBI to all users. The latter doesn't work when it can come at the expense of the former (and it certainly doesn't work for social media, which is mostly a popularity contest). The only reason anyone can earn a payout is due to the fact that people are actually buying STEEM in the first place. When minnows demand more payouts without making investments themselves, they're essentially demanding that someone else take on the risk of investment and then reward them...mostly so that they can cash out and put more downward pressure on prices. This is precisely why invested users carry more weight when it comes to rewards allocation.
It also removes/displaces accountability from the larger invested user and puts the onus of being responsible on the non-invested or less-invested user. And this is something that DPoS was supposed to theoretically protect against. An invested user would want to protect their investment by ensuring a degree of fairness and by supporting quality contributions on the platform. This happens to be the reason why delegation has mostly proven to be a failure. We see the daily results of irresponsible actors all the time when entrusted with large stakes for bid bots, pet projects, or simply for "better curation."
True. And what has made self-voting easier/desirable and more lucrative? Linear rewards and the 10-vote daily target. But we should keep trusting STINC to "fix" the problems that they continue to create and exacerbate.
Currently, there are so many different failure points that it's hard to pinpoint the exact cause for each of them. Too many changes were made in too short a time last year and it has thrown the entire system out of whack. The protocols and algorithms are now incoherent in the first place, which is why so much is wrong. But all of this was stated back when the hard forks were proposed and very few cared. And still...not enough people care.
I value balance and Steemit is an amazing space to practise and learn about it. I agree that investors generally aren't here to give their money to other people.. However, some actually are.. Charities receive huge funding for exactly that reason and Steem has the power to take out the middle man and that's attractive to a lot of people.
I'm not suggesting Steem should be a charity at all.. But just that philanthropy isn't dead and everyone has a different objective and agenda.
From my perspective, if Steem Ocean helps just a few 'big' accounts to use their voting in a more distributed way, then that can have a great overall effect on the PR of Steem and may result in more investors coming along to join in the peaceful vibes. In fact, @adamkokesh just announced a few days ago his intention to hugely change his voting patterns (using half a million Steem) after I pointed him to his profile on Steem ocean. This to me is a great win for the platform and it was entirely voluntary on his part, with no pressure from me.
That is awesome, it is my hopes too that more users will want to place higher on the list as well.
@ erodedthoughts shutup you nazi fag child raper phedo sicko bully fuck off from my blog you sick sorry of a man
keep downvoting my blogs for your sick entertainment.
stop stalking me go molest your own children or your neighbours you sick fuck
leave me alone you cunt stop stalking me and downvoting my posts
Now, I don't think his votes are just randomly given to any post made by a minnow and since a minnow is 10k SP or less many do not have 60k to dump into steemit. I don't even see many 60+ Rep users having 10k SP. So attacking a user who is using his stake to grow smaller users, not spammy new users is invalid.
Agreed steemit is set up for the largest wallet to take the largest stake but when users do just that there is also outrage among the user base. That is why I posted this site, it gives vote data. You type in any name and scroll down you have all the upvoted post right there at the value it was updated. 10 post per day rather they add value or not is questionable but is it the posting of ten post per day the issue or the voting of ten post per day the issue?
Many times we talk about what is wrong and even though we often agree on many of the topics, your reasons as well as mine may not overflow to those who can find use from the data this site provides.
In any event users that put out a small amount to a broad set of users and a large amount to their other large SP holding accounts are just using each other as an ATM at the expense of everyone. The fucking site motto is some shit like "where your voice is worth something", they should change that to "where your wallet matters" if the large SP accounts are the only ones who matter.
Again many do not understand all the mechanics of their VP, like dust voting, users who get max rewards stolen from curators if they self vote at the time of their post and so on.
One battle at a time @ats-david, we are in the same fight, let us not squabble.
@ erodedthoughts shutup you nazi fag child raper phedo sicko bully fuck off from my blog you sick sorry of a man
keep downvoting my blogs for your sick entertainment.
stop stalking me go molest your own children or your neighbours you sick fuck
leave me alone you cunt stop stalking me and downvoting my posts
@ erodedthoughts shutup you nazi fag child raper phedo sicko bully fuck off from my blog you sick sorry of a man
keep downvoting my blogs for your sick entertainment.
stop stalking me go molest your own children or your neighbours you sick fuck
leave me alone you cunt stop stalking me and downvoting my posts
RancidRelaxo is rated #6... Maaaaaan that guy's got such a big heart LOLzzz
I'm like #65,000 or so because I must be plain awful :D
Are you here 7 days a week, voting every few hours?
@ranchorelaxo votes a ton to one user but if You look at all the data that is shown. As always one has to look at all the data and not just the rank. This site will also cripple a self-voters score and the earlier one self-votes for themselves the worse.
Just about :D
Maybe we can get @ura-soul to do the exact breakdown of the scoring system. At least your not a zero like some of the users like Scamfield.
Thanks for pointing that out @overkillcoin. The algorithm awards a score for various measurements, including level of self voting, amount of accounts voted for and also the amount of money paid out as a result of the votes.
Originally, the algorithm gave much less weight to the amount of money paid out than it does now - which was in alignment with the intended idea of showing generosity rather than 'wealth' - however, after testing for a while it became apparent that because some people upvote 1000s of accounts with less than a cent per vote, the top users in the table were often not really actually giving anyone anything useful.. Is it really generous to give thousands of people an amount of money that is so small they can't even use it? I don't think it is.
Since money level is the only metric that can't be 'gamed' I decided to give more weight back to the wallet size.
However, since you have pointed out this issue with ranchorelaxo (who only voted 6 accounts), I will further adjust the algorithms to give wallet size less weight in the calculation.
You can see that ranchorelaxo paid out over $10,000 SBD in one week, which is pretty huge. Each of the accounts in the top ranks is there for a reason and it tends to be because they don't self vote and either have a high vote payout, a high number of accounts they vote for or both.
I'll adjust the system soon and the new calculations should be online in the next 12 hours.
@ erodedthoughts shutup you nazi fag child raper phedo sicko bully fuck off from my blog you sick sorry of a man
keep downvoting my blogs for your sick entertainment.
stop stalking me go molest your own children or your neighbours you sick fuck
leave me alone you cunt stop stalking me and downvoting my posts
@ erodedthoughts shutup you nazi fag child raper phedo sicko bully fuck off from my blog you sick sorry of a man
keep downvoting my blogs for your sick entertainment.
stop stalking me go molest your own children or your neighbours you sick fuck
leave me alone you cunt stop stalking me and downvoting my posts
I am currently placed at 481 with about 297 unique accounts and over 700 votes with zero self votes.
Peopled have argued that I am missing a lot of curation rewards on my posts by not self voting and getting a piece of the pie.
That I am wasting away the delegations that I have when I should be upvoting myself a ton of times to make money.
Well I chose to get the delegations and that it was a good way of using the delegations I have received from nice people. @ura-soul being one that delegated a part to me.
I had the same reaction though when I saw relaxo but looking at it because of zero self votes and a large part of curation rewards go to other people and the vote value that is why he placed so high.
It is really important to look at all the data.
Glad that you found it useful. I do to as I check myself weekly.
Thanks again for your support. I will be updating the algorithms tonight to give vote payout slightly less sway.. The algorithms are definitely a work in progress!
I find huge value in it and is why I thought it deserved its own post. People have to look at all the data and that is always a problem on steemit, people like to look at one number and point fingers and not the overall benefit to all users instead of a few.
@ erodedthoughts shutup you nazi fag child raper phedo sicko bully fuck off from my blog you sick sorry of a man
keep downvoting my blogs for your sick entertainment.
stop stalking me go molest your own children or your neighbours you sick fuck
leave me alone you cunt stop stalking me and downvoting my posts
Unfortunately, much of this can be gamed by simply making fake accounts and up voting them. @Sweetsssj has been caught in her own circle jerk of making accounts and up voting them all. I believe she had 8 different accounts that would have their comments or something up voted in the last day. Then, all 8 accounts went to the same wallet on an exchange because the code in the memo was exactly the same for all 8 accounts.
@ura-soul, I am not sure there is a way to fix things like this with an algorithm. A lot of people hide behind multiple accounts to change their true, "Self-vote value."
Do you think it may be an option to blacklist, or remove known malicious actors from the rankings until a time in which this prove they have changed somehow?
Removing them is a bad idea, maybe make their name red as "questionable" taking them off just lets them hide more.
Always more data to draw a conclusion is best, less is bad. The way it is setup now shows the amount voted out and the number of accounts voted on. Anyone giving out thousands to less than a few 100 accounts is 100% questionable. Under each user is also each vote cast, so there is better information here than just a number and a rank.
@ erodedthoughts shutup you nazi fag child raper phedo sicko bully fuck off from my blog you sick sorry of a man
keep downvoting my blogs for your sick entertainment.
stop stalking me go molest your own children or your neighbours you sick fuck
leave me alone you cunt stop stalking me and downvoting my posts
Thanks for all your work on this!
I just checked mine and it is horrible!! My vote rank is 11550!! I need to get voting, a funny thing is I do every day. I may miss a day here and there. I am proud to say my self-vote is 0%.
You can only grow from that point.
Yup :)
@ erodedthoughts shutup you nazi fag child raper phedo sicko bully fuck off from my blog you sick sorry of a man
keep downvoting my blogs for your sick entertainment.
stop stalking me go molest your own children or your neighbours you sick fuck
leave me alone you cunt stop stalking me and downvoting my posts
@ erodedthoughts shutup you nazi fag child raper phedo sicko bully fuck off from my blog you sick sorry of a man
keep downvoting my blogs for your sick entertainment.
stop stalking me go molest your own children or your neighbours you sick fuck
leave me alone you cunt stop stalking me and downvoting my posts