You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Curation rewards are extremely low, only bots are willing to work for pennies/hour
Sorry for two replies, but here is an example of a high paying post that had a larger share of curation rewards for the users. You and I had a good long conversation in this post if you remember ;)
yeah I remember of course :)
So does it means that your post wasn't upvoted by bots before the 30 min mark? if so why?
I really think they should solve the bot problem differently , because this is hurting real human curators. It's hurting everyone actually even bots. Curators should receive a fixed amount of the reward's payout.
Bots are only part of the picture. Anyone who votes with a lot of SP (whether it is a bot or human) is going to have a large influence on the curation rewards. For my post, most of the big SP votes came after the 30 minute mark.
I think most of the curators are OK with the 30 minute limit. There is a game to be played, and there are still lots of routes to go that can earn good curation rewards. Voting for the top posts where the author gets tons of upvotes right away though is not the best place to do it though.
Also I have noticed that bots do not upvote posts exactly at the same time, some 2min,5min,10 min after post was published so I think it would be trivial to game the system, people could set up a timer to upvote post 30 min after it was published, Im sure many do this already.
The main question is why the heck do bots upvote before 30 min knowing that if they do so the curation payout will decrease and why does the curation payouts even decreases, what is the purpose of this? preventing bots to upvote before 30 min? it clearly isn't working..
It's an arms race between the different bots and real people. Voting earlier lowers the percentage reward for curation but getting in earlier than the other bots means that you get more of the curation payout. There is no perfect time to do it and people and bots are constantly fighting over this. Without the rule there would be no parameter to adjust and bots would win every time. It is not ideal but it actually improves the odds for real curators.
I get what you mean but i still don't understand why they vote before 30 min when they could all set up their bot to vote after 30 min and benefit from the large curation percentage.
Because if someone votes before them they get the majority of the reward, even if the reward is smaller. All it takes is for one to do it slightly earlier so maybe someone does it at 29 minutes and they get nearly the full reward and vote on it first. Then next time someone goes at 28 minutes and so on. Although the total curation reward goes down it may still be worth doing if you can vote first or second or third. Ultimately it becomes a race to the lowest level where it is still profitable there are so many potential variables that it may not be possible to have a perfect algorithm.
Further some people may actually want he majority of their rewards to go to the poster.
Do you know how the algorithm works, like how many percentage does the first,second,third,etc.. gets?
I see curating as the main way for people to make money on the platform.
As they say, only 1% of the users of a website actively create new content, while the other 99% of the participants consume it.
Curation is extremely important because of this, steemit will have to find a way for the 99% to make money and that's going to be through curation.
In the future I can easily see 10% go to authors and 90% go to curators because that's what the demographic tells us. If you want the 99% who consume content to buy steem power you need to make it worthwhile for them.
I seem to remember seeing a graph on it way back. I don't remember the exact figures but it goes down from the moment of posting to the 30 minute mark as a percentage. I don't know the exact figures for curation rewards percentage depending on where you vote in the queue. It is a function of when you vote AND the voting power you have (the stake you put in) so it is not a straightforward value.
It doesn't really matter to me that much I just upvote people whenever. Like someone else said it has the side effect of encouraging people to vote on unknown authors if they want good curation rewards. For me the most important priority is encouraging other users and rewarding good posts. If I get rewarded for curation great but I don't care much about it.
You don't care much because you receive some rewards from creating content, if you couldn't make a penny by posting I think you would be really happy to be able to make money curating. ( and that's about the majority of people in this platform)
I personnaly think we should get rid of the bots altogether with some captcha or something
You can make money if you curate intelligently. It takes had work though and I think that is the real problem.
Everyone can potentially make money posting but I understand that not everyone wants to put the time in that is required to do that. It is not something that everyone enjoys and some people aren't going to bother unless they make big rewards right away.
IMO that is just unrealistic and short sighted. You don't get something for nothing - or at least 99.99% of the time you don't.
The problem with trying to get rid of bots using captchas is that they can access the blockchain directly so it wouldn't work. We just have to accept the bots are there and will always be there.
Further if curation rewards are all you care about and you don't want to go to the trouble of curating new authors you can use the guidelines put forth by @laonie to configure your own voting bot.