RE: The Daily Bragging-Post about how many people I vote for!
Have you @fyrstikken considered the risks involved with your bot? Are you confident the bot will always vote for users that will help the platform?
My bot runs on my own computer by me, it is not run on a and others that voluntarily will vote for everyone will of course upvote (with a very small percentage) every post that is made, but counter-mechanisms like @cheetah will of course have more power to downvote plagiarism and re-distribute our vote in those cases.
Your labeling "Picking favorites" as selfish maybe "so last year" but so what?
Steemit.com has too few active users at the moment, There are 123,000 accounts on my upvote-list and only 505 Posts were made during the past 24h period. Picking favourites and ignoring everyone else has not worked in our favour which is to grow this platform so that there are more content-creators. If you look here, you can see how few votes people throw: https://steemdb.com/labs/rshares - @curie is not even on the list, @ned is #2 with 43 votes and @blocktrades is #1 with 29 votes... etc... Those numbers should grow to 3-4 digits imho but at a smaller %
How is voting for others if you want them to vote for you not selfish?
Q1. Do you want people to vote for you?
Q2. Do you vote for other people?
I am sure everyone want people to vote for their posts - in fact, it is a fact - you all want your posts to get votes, so let me just answer YES for you on question number 1.
On Question number 2, Do you vote for other people, well - according to: https://steemdb.com/@full-steem-ahead/curation you vote for 1 post every once in a while, so I will answer your question and say: NO, you do not vote for other people.
So what is more selfish? Voting for people or not voting for people? - https://steemdb.com/@full-steem-ahead/authoring 74 people voted for your last post and made you $10 bucks, I would say you have some serious voting to do to break even :)
Your article is focused on growing the number of users but not the quality of users. A balanced perspective is missing here.
Yes, I am focused on growing the number of users, the quantity of curation creators. A Balanced perspective exists in the fact that others are focused on quality when they see it, or downvote plagiarism/spam/etc.
Remember - that when you upvote everyone with a small percentage, you still have most of your voting-power to upvote things you really read and really like.
You can call it a symbolic vote if you like, it is still a vote and we win more people to create more stuff.
Thanks for answering for me, I couldn't have misrepresented myself nearly as well as you did LOL.
I'll admit I'm selective, that's my main point here. I'll also admit that since I stopped using SteemVoter my voting has dropped off dramatically. I need to get back in the habit of voting manually. For example, I failed to vote for your article, but I have corrected that mistake, not that you'll benefit from it. That's probably why I didn't vote for it when I read it.
Your comment here also reflects the apparently limited history of steemdb, so when you make a blanket statement that "NO, you do not vote for other people." you are working with inaccurate data and thus your assessment is incorrect.
Another thing I will need to get back in the habit of is the use of the voting strength slider and overall voting power I have as I vote each time. It would be so much more intuitive if the slider always represented how much strength you had at the time you cast a vote, rather than requiring users to figure that out for every vote they cast. Lets see, how much power do I have right now? Did I vote my usual users and leave myself enough for new users I like? When did I vote last? All that complexity is unnecessary and is also a hindrance for newbies to figure out.
Anyway, thx for the reply.