HF21 Addition: Vote Window Change
Hello Steemians, in the interest of keeping you all fully informed about the upcoming Hardfork we would like to inform you of a change that was proposed by the Witnesses with near-unanimous support. The change would reduce the “vote window” of a post from 15 minutes to 1 minute. Previously this window had been 30 minutes, but was reduced to 15 minutes in Hardfork 20.
Vote Window?
What the “vote window” means is that if a Steem user upvotes a post (“comments” are a type of post) immediately after it is published, they will receive a reduced curation reward. Only once 15 minutes have elapsed, and a vote is rendered, will that Steem user receive the full curation reward.
Because the Witnesses presented unanimous support, we coded up the changes and merged them into the release candidate. But we can easily undo these changes if necessary. We do not have any reason to believe that this change would adversely impact Steem, but we have not had sufficient time to perform the level of analysis we would ideally prefer.
If you’d like to learn more, @thecryptodrive has written a post that explains why he supports this change.
Your Witnesses
If you would like to learn more about why the Witnesses have made this decision, or if you do not agree with their decision, please let them know in the comments sections below. Ultimately it is your delegated stake that gives the Witnesses the authority to make these decisions, and if you do not feel those decisions are the right ones, then you should remove your Witness vote and allocate it to a Witness whose decisions are more aligned with your interests.
The Steemit Team
I have a feeling this is going to be either the best hardfork ever or the worst hardfork ever :D
Hoping for the best.
Have the same impression
Posted using Partiko iOS
Well, hopefully since the last hard fork hard forked us all, this one will be a bit better.
Most new people using this system were getting pretty screwed. They see a post, upvote it, and don't even know they are losing a bunch of their curation rewards. The rule was really made for back when we had exponetial rewards and the same 10 authors were the only ones making anything. So, getting on the post first really mattered. Here it's not as important since the change to linear rewards. To me new users are losing curation rewards as the con, and there's really no more pro since the change to linear. It's an easy decision to include for me.
Hah, not true, If you are the first voter you get 1/4 of your vote value to start with and not 1/8 of your vote value whenever you vote.
Solid point and just for that reason alone I think it's a solid change.
Things like this comment are the reason that witnesses need to take time to make posts about how they feel about proposals.
I like the change of 1 min window. Good idea and initiative.
Where are such discussions being held? We've been seeking to join the Steemit slack for so long, unfortunately to no listening ears, if that's where those chats take place...
As a witness currently ranked 34, @actifit is very much interested in participating and voicing out our opinion wherever we find necessary or helpful.
We are supportive of above decision from our perspective.
I like this change I think it goes more hand in hand with "natural use"... Read it, if you like it upvote it, none of the BS of trying to remember to go back 15 minutes later.
Anytime will be gamed by bots, so this just allows humans to get in there too.
Of course many quality posts can't be read in 1 minute, so guessing the real curators will lose out to the in this only for the profit curators.
the use of the word curation on this platform is largely bastardized. It's more a voting race while other people who take the concept of curation seriously plod along behind to find the real jewels.
Most can be read faster than 15 minutes though. Unless they're really boring. Or long. Or long and boring. Mostly long and boring.
There are other types of quality content that can be reviewed very quickly though. Drawings take a quite a long time to do and can be viewed for quality pretty quickly. Photographs as well.
My point exactly.
Without a doubt that would be precisely the case. Yes @practicalthought, very accurate. ;)
I still don't understand this "go back 15 minutes later" thing.
For most people in most cases, the curation reward is the largest if the vote is placed between 5-10 minutes. And it will take 5 minutes in most cases to find a post and read it. So even if someone knows how the curation window works, waiting is unnecessary. So you can simply not pay attention to it.
https://beempy.com/curation/@whatsup/mathematical-incentives-only-work-if-the-stakeholders-use-them
I'm pretty sure most people don't run statistical analysis on whether or not it's worth to just vote early. There are a ton of people who get crap for rewards, so it's not like they'll get a ton of rewards suddenly after a few minutes.
These kinda things can be done easily by bots though.
No, but it's a valid counter-argument to aggroed's point that we are saving newbies from losing curation rewards when, actually, voting within the 15 mins can result in much higher rewards.
Well I don't math, so... and I shouldn't have to Math to read a damn post and upvoteit.
I know that this is ridiculous that this voting system is complicated for the user. But ... we are changing from
"the system where you really don't need to make any waiting for vote BS"
to
"the system where you really don't need to make any waiting for vote BS, but voting bots get more curation rewards than users"
Well that's how it is going to work no matter what.
It's always been true - it's how the central bank of steem works.
All this 1 minute window is doing is mitigating the mixture of increasing curation rewards plus a decrease in payouts for most posts. If the 15 mins was kept, then it would add some curation-reward losses for some upvoters.
It is giving with one hand and taking away with the other - while algorithmic-curation-rewards-mining will be done by the fastest bots.
Yeah, I have a similar position.
It might even be easier for bots. Hell, they can even calculate whether it's worth it to vote early if there's another bot that tends to vote early as well.
This will be beneficial for comment upvoting and I don't really see a difference between 15 minutes to 1 minute when people are going to automate it anyways!
That's exactly right @lunaticpandora. :)
Upvoting comments is actually something else quite different than reward author's posts and original content from a curation point of view
1 minute or less may be enough to read entirely a comment and upvote it if is deserved. Though, while a comment even can be longer, juicier and tastier than a whole original post, the willing to reward them handsomely in signal of appreciation & recognition, mostly have anything to do with 'curation rewards'
In my humble redfish opinion a 5 minute window might work more ideally than 1 minute, so as to encourage people to actually read the posts they are upvoting/curating, as opposed to just skimming the contents to get the jump on everyone else in the curation game..
Just vote on what you like and feel deserves some rewards or recognition. If you think about being in a curation "game" then the system is already flawed. At least with HF21 you'll get better curstion rewards by just voting what you like compared to now.
I personally do not try to game anything. I actively currate based on quality of the post. My whole point is to encourage others to do the same. More people would likely read a post as opposed to skim it if the window was 5 minutes instead of 1.
Yep, I agree @paradigm42!! That's exactly what 'currate' actually means. ;)
I agree, don't care so much about rewards on curation, do care about what you reward.
Those using their own scripts for voting are going to do very well placing their votes in this window. Those using steemauto/steemvoter will have varying results, although not anywhere close to those running their own setup.
IF
curators come out of the woodwork to find undervalued content, 1 minute will work well for those quick to see the potential of a post.
I made the 'if' quite big, not sure if it should be bigger.
Of course @abh12345.
It's more than obvious that the 'if' should be way bigger!! };)
This is being gamed by experts and enthusiasts for experts and enthusiasts. I don't see how further complicating things is going to attract a ton of people.
The beauty of Steem was anyone could understand amd do dpos.
Now try to explain how to do it well without robots and with reading and not memorizing a list of consistently good authors (by good I mean actually good and not just Steem VVIPs)
Posted using Partiko Android
make it bigger lol
that's as big as it gets, sorry :P
This is GREAT news....
...for witnesses, whales, insiders, staff, and bots.
It takes from the 'have-nots' to enrich the 'haves'. It's another nail in the coffin of this community.
The big game here is making curation more profitable than content creation. In the long term, it is expected that curation patterns change in benefit for the authors, but that might not happen.
A vote received before 30/15 mins meant more author reward, and even that is taken out of the equation? what's left for authors if people keep curating the same way they've been doing it so far? How will new users be persuaded to come use Steemit if chances for a reward are being diminished with each hardfork?
I'm not very optimistic about these changes as I see those with the more stake receiving more out of their cryptocurrencies and giving less for this site to function as it was previously designed. I'm afraid curation patterns will stay the same and authors will be less motivated to create content. The long run you hope for might not happen...
The vote window has been a major problem for a long time. I have never seen any reason to have it so long. If I see a post and vote it it should only matter what my stake is, not the timeframe in which I vote the post. This hopefully will remove the stupid game of curating and make it more organic. Making a game automatically makes people try to cheat it or maximize it. If everyone is equal across the board then there is more likely to be honest curation.
At least I hope.