Feb ’18 DMania Steem App Analysis – BlockChain Business Intelligence
DMania is a fun app built upon the Steem Blockchain that allows you earn STEEM by posting or up voting on memes, funny pictures and videos.
DMania is the brain child of @zombee and the project has received funding from Steemit Inc by way of delegated power from @misterdelegation.
The aim of this analysis is to monitor the monthly activity from @DMania in terms of voting. It is also to analyse posts made via the DMania app and posts made to the DMania category on the STEEM Blockchain
This analysis will be carried out on a monthly basis so that trends can be established and growth measured.
The Data
Using PowerBI, I have connected to the SteemSQL database (paid subscription service held and managed by @arcange).
The Analysis
February @DMania Votes Analysis
In Feb 2018 DMania voted 695 times for 250 Authors. The average vote pay out was SBD $54 and the total approx. pay out given by DMania was SBD $37.81K We can also see from above that the average % voting weight used by @DMania was 39.43% and the average number of votes given per day was 24.8.
February Voting Time Series
Popular Streemers in terms of Upvotes from @DMania
#DMania Tag Post Analysis
In February 62K posts were made by 8224 authors receiving 89K comments and 646K votes. The pay-out value of these posts was SBD $73.58K.
The average post pay out in Feb for #DMania posts was $1.18 – substantially lower than the overall post pay out average on the Steemit blockchain
We see above that DMania have given out approx. SBD $37.81K. That equates to 51% of the total rewards for this category/tag/app
These 62K posts received 89K comments from 13.04K authors. The comments received 25K votes and received rewards of SBD $2.61K
Creators
Below shows which accounts have posted the most to DMania in the month of February
And the list below shows those that engage with the posts via comments
Conclusion
DMania is an awesome project, receiving 62K posts in the month of Feb and voting for 695 of them. This means that almost 1 in 90 posts made will be voted on by @DMania. @DMania voted on average 24.8 times a day in Feb. I am not sure how much of this is manual curation and how they pick the posts they vote on – maybe someone from the DMania team could let me know?
51% of the pay out in this category comes from @DMania. This is lower than other DApps I have reported on however there is also a big difference in the average post pay out for other apps and Steemit in general. For DMania to be self-sufficient this % of pay-out is ideal however for a short time there should be a consideration to increase this to about 75% to boost pay-outs in Dmania.
Welcome to the block @DMania – I wish you every success in with this project. I will be preparing this report on a monthly basis to track the progress of the project
Do you have any questions or queries on the data above? If so, please do leave a comment below
I am part of a Blockchain Business Intelligence community. We all post under the tag #blockchainbi. If you have an analysis you would like carried out on Steemit data, please do contact me or any of the #blockchainbi team and we will do our best to help you...
You can find #blockchainbi on discord https://discordapp.com/invite/JN7Yv7j
May be in next update comments from bots will decrease 😂
Thanks for doing this analysis, very interesting. I didn't know that many posts are made on dMania.
To answer your question: Currently people that delegated SP to dMania can decide what the bot votes on. It's a pretty complex algorithm, you can read the details in @zombee's newest post.
It's really not that complex.
Here, I'll sum it up:
It's pay to play, just like the overall architecture of Steemit. It's just that instead of paying the whole Steemit blockchain by buying/acquiring SP, you by access to the DMania voting pool by giving it your SP.
Other than a few marginal refinements and a very undefined policy about "abusive users," it's essentially the same system.
The difference is that you can't upvote yourself, only by using multiple accounts, that would be an example of abusing.
You don't need to Invest/delegate a single penny to dMania. Just many users don't get it because they post sh*t and then complain that they get no upvotes.
Which, because we've seen an example of how to exploit the heck out of that process, will take roughly 3 1/2 seconds to reimplement under the new limitations.
You only need to invest/delegate a single penny to DMania if you want your opinion to matter. It is, after all, still a proof of stake system – which means that you can just buy your way into having some margin of control.
Is that a fair presentation? Perhaps not. Is it and accurate presentation? Without a doubt.
You will always have abusers, that's why zombee is working on a way to automatically detect them and blacklist them.
Another way to completely eliminate abuse would be manual curators, but then people would complain that it is unfair etc., also you would need many curators.
Also, maybe I don't get your point, but nobody denied that this is a proof of stake system, or that this is 'unfair' in some peoples view.
I was making the oppositional point to your "you don't need to invest/delegate a single penny to DMania." You don't in a "you must be compelled to," but you do if you want the ability to direct the resources of DMania – and you can do so to any degree that you can afford.
The problem with that from my perspective is that it is entirely an orthogonal issue to whether the content being voted on is any good at all. One might suggest that the lack of concern with that particular point is part of the design. Eventually, and inevitably, the votes will only be driven by those who have sunk the most external funds and earning potential into that particular subset of blockchain content. They will be greatly incentivized to form mutualistic subgroups which focus on posts from that subgroup to the exclusion of others, because that's reasonable. Some of these subgroups will be automated and some of them will be simply collaborated, but they are inevitable.
The problem with automatically detecting and blacklisting a lot of these forms of "exploit" is that they are identical to the formation of communities, of people who like each other's work, and who are engaging with the system in a purely organic matter.
Manual curators are absolutely no way to eliminate abuse, because we both know that manual curators are open to all sorts of personal exploitation themselves. They can be bribed, they can be persuaded, they can simply not be fair-minded. Arguably, manual curators are the most abusive solution of all, but at least they have the most accountability to go along with it.
I wasn't referring to fairness of the system suggested, I was contemplating the fairness of the presentation and restatement of the system suggested.
The system is not complex. It's all about buying votes. Perhaps more damningly, it's about buying votes with a resource that you can no longer use to signal to the system that you think other things need to be rewarded. It locks a supporter down into only caring about one type of thing until/unless they withdraw their delegation and thus are excluded from the group of people who decide where this series of rather large votes could be driven.
It's the SP delegation that I really feel is the weak point here. Unfortunately, it's of a piece with the rest of the system that also makes me uncomfortable in several ways.
When it comes to this sort of thing, the best you can hope for is a least-worst solution, and I'm not sure this is it.
Thanks for the explanation, now I get your point.
I'm busy right now, but I will answer later if I find some time.
The list of users who engage with the posts via comments made me smile because most of these commenters are bid-bots.
And in general, Dmania project surprises me with its strange love to voting bots. Am I the only one who noticed a correlation between the number of bid-bots' votes gathered under a someone's post and the next upcoming upvote from Dmania?
I will be glad to hear that it was only with the posts that caught my eye, and in fact the situation in common is different.
Btw, why you do not publish your analyzes through Utopian, you can be rewarded for your hard work?
wish I could post via utopian but as it relates to a single community as such the post will not be accepted