A little advice, when you use @randowhale
If you don't know what @randowhale is, check its latest post here:
Now, I don't think @randowhale is a great idea, but it's there and why wouldn't you use it ...
I like it as a reply to whaleshares, which I think is a really bad idea.
However, I'm not here to judge this stuff, but to give you a little suggestion.
Just for completeness, this is the curation reward over time:
This means, if you vote before the 30 minute-mark, you will get a penalty on your curation rewards (the cut off rewards go to the author of the post).
This was implemented to take away the advantage of voting-bots, which could upvote extremely fast during the first seconds.
But this isn't where I'm getting at.
This is an idealized curation rewards/r_shares graph:
The curation rewards are calculated with the square root of the r_shares. This should result in a curve like above, or similar.
r_shares are calculated by Steem Power, Voting Power and Voting Weight.
(whales have a stronger vote than minnows -> more r_shares)
This curve means, that curators get the most curation rewards, when they vote for a post, which hasn't yet received many r_shares.
That is why, I don't recommend letting the @randowhale vote on your post right after you have written it. It makes it less attractive to vote on for manual curators, who want to maximize curation rewards.
For @randowhale it doesn't matter, how old the post is. (Unless of course it's too old to be voted for) @randowhale will vote regardless.
The above curve doesn't take into account, how you get more rewards for votes coming in after your own vote. This is also part of the calculation and means, that all your curators benefit even more, when @randowhale votes after them and not before.
It is so great that you told how rewards calculated. Do you know exact formula for r_shares?
Sadly, I don't know this.
I don't vote on posts with a randowhale vote. So, good tip!
My view of things like @randowhale
You're holding it wrong!
I think it's a good idea, but people are using it the wrong way. People tend to use it for gaining some profit by letting it vote early. They see a way to pay 2 SBD and receive more back. But that's just wrong usage 😣
It's a reward mechanism for other writers and followers!
Since it's not good to make your biggest reward coming in before everyone else votes you will ALWAYS reward your curators and not only yourself. Why then use it as a money maker?
Instead you should look at @randowhale and WhaleShares as a way to reward your curators, if you vote on your own posts. But I personally think that these services should be best put in practice of promoting other posts that you find undervalued.
This way you pay a small "fee" to make good promotion for writers you like, make them more visible and also reward these that curated it. You can gain some instant power without having to own a huge sum of coins.
Conclusion
So stop using it as a way to gain money, use it to promote other writers and possibly by rewarding your followers.
Vote @sc-steemit for Witness.
Proud Supporter of the Cryptocurrency Gridcoin
It is being used as a part of the #payitforward scheme. I used it too a few times already and will write about it. Since my vote isn't going to make a big difference on its own...I donated 2 SBD @randowhale so that it would give authors a random vote on a post as a way to #payitforward since I got inspired by @kennyskitchen to find good content creators and share some good vibes on Steemit. Minnows should unite.
I had no idea about the order of it - that getting a randowhale vote in the first minutes after you post hurt curators. I'm sure a lot of people don't actively think about it. I know now. I have to disagree that it's wrong to have randowhale vote on your own post.
That said, it's best used on the posts of others as well. I think everyone can benefit :-)
Oh no, take my words back - I've tried and this is GOLD. You feel yourself as whale, who vote and it counts.
That's what I mean. You gain the power of a whale without having to invest a huge amount of money into the platform.
btw: *You're
🤣 👍
I'll take this advice, thanks
For the first few times, @randowhale was useful, but when I used it more and more I realized that there was something wrong with it.
Thanks for the advice, I'll try to apply it.
I don't think there is anything wrong with it technically.
It's like Viagra. if you (not you!!!) use it, technically everything is perfect.
lmfao :D
"Now, I don't think @randowhale is a great idea, but it's there and why wouldn't you use it ..."
Damit hast Du meine Sicht auf den Punkt gebracht @felixxx.
Loving your super hyperbola :P
I thought the mark was in 20 min so going to steem voter straight away.
Beso!
Use Streemian instead. steemvoter upvotes themselves to trending every day. It's terrible.
Wow, will do. Gracias!
They will probably still use your posting key for self-voting, if you don't change it or sign out ( I don't know this exactly )
You can remove the key from steemvoter. If your not feeling sure about this it's always good to change your keys (by changing your main password). It's a good and simple service. Streemian is probably good to, but it stopped working when I was going to try it out so for the moment I'm still with steemvoter 😏
I think the self-votes are bad for steem.
Yes, I can agree on that!
That they vote on themselves are just silly.
I commented here about self voting on posting that I think is another problem. I have a suggestion on how to handle it, but it will need a change to how the system works.
PS. I pay for the service, so they are not using my power for voting for themselves.
Streemian is free.
I prefer Streemian.
I'm still learning the whole voting and promoting system here in Steemit and it's a little confusing.. Author rewards, curator rewards, Steem Power, delegation etc etc.. But the more I read about these, the more I understand them. So back to reading huh? :D
I'm not tech savvy but maybe one day I will be and will understand all of this ^^
That's helpful. I have used their service only twice but I don't think it worths...
Regarding your second graph..
This implies that the more posts a person upvotes the better the return on investment, i.e. the square rooting means that (all else being equal) one 100% vote will earn less than two 50% votes.
This doesn't seem right. What am I missing?
the x-axis is the r_shares received.
Ok, thanks.