Crypto Academy Week 6 Homework Post for (Sapwood) - Steem Blockchain (Convergent Linear Reward)
Professor @sapwood tackled the ''Convergenet Linear Reward'' topic in this week's lecture. He showed us in fine detail the economic and social consequences of the individual's individual behavior on the Steem blockchain. He proved with mathematical formulas how it would affect both himself and the Steem blockchain if he moved with the community.
As always, he gave us homework. Now I move on to answering these questions.
(1) What are the economic & social ramifications of self-upvote in Steem Blockchain? Do you gain better curation rewards by upvoting others as compared to self-upvote? (Include real examples)
Self-voting on the steem blockchain has been debated from the very beginning and has not been decided. I read the articles on this subject in 2016 and 2017. There are many who think that self-voting should be reasonable. There is another segment that thinks everyone has the right to use their property as they wish. A small minority thinks that their own voting should be lifted. Today, you have the right to vote for yourself on centralized social platforms (where you don't feel free enough). The abolition of self-voting would be inversely proportional to the freedom of the person. It also reduces the whales' Steem investment and lowers the Steem price.
There are those who think that self-voting should be reasonable. I am one of those who think this way. My self voting rate is 14.45% when I check the Steemworld site. I think this ratio is a ratio that will be accepted by everyone. I don't think it will bother anybody in the community. If you overestimate the issue of voting yourself, you will be ostracized by the community. We can also make an analogy like this. Think of someone who constantly praises himself in friendship, what a repulsive behavior this is.
Haejin, one of the popular users of the Steem blockchain, was ostracized by the community for posting 10 posts a day and constantly voting. But now he posts 2-3 posts a day. Trying to keep up with the community.
Steem blockchain is a decentralized social platform.It requires interaction to be a fully social platform. We can increase the interaction by voting and commenting not only on our own but also to others. A vote on anyone's quality post can lead them to meet us. Thus, interaction with people gradually increases. Self-voting adds no value to the Steem network. It reduces interaction.
Everything is obvious in the graph drawn by the professor above.
If you constantly vote for yourself, you won't get enough curation awards. You stay in the lower zone. It is an economic disadvantage for you. If you vote for posts that have been upvoted by too many people (with the same upvote value as you), you will notice that you have won more curation awards. As the upvote value of a postal increases, after a certain point the curation prize becomes more and more linear. This means gaining more curation awards.
(2) What is the difference between isolated judgment and community judgment in curation? How do you adapt to community judgment on quality content in Steem Blockchain? Does that bring economic incentive for you? If yes, explain with real examples, (include screenshots and compare them with your isolated judgment)?
The biggest difference between isolated judgment and community judgment is the consensus on quality content. There is no consensus on isolated judgment. There is consensus in the community judgment. The consensus reached with the community has economic benefits. Steem blockchain algorithm rewards consensus on quality content with better curation gains.
As seen in the graph, when the SP size in the post reaches 10,000, the gain in the curation award gradually increases. When the SP size in the post reaches 1 million, the earning in the curation reward becomes more linear. It gets much more linear after 2.5 million SP.
Let's consider 3 people each with 900,000 SP voting power. When they try to rate themselves, the upvote value in the post becomes $ 30.8522.
If all 3 agree on a quality post, the total upvote rate for the post would be $ 98,6181.
The difference is: 98.6181- (3*30.8522) = 98.6181- 92.5566 =6.0615$
With the consensus that more users will arrive, the curation gain will start to become even more linear.
For posts where the SP size will increase even more, the curation award will be even more linear. There are a few users with 10 million SP on the Steem blockchain. When other users agree on quality content, the SP size in posts will exceed 10 million. Thus, curation earnings will increase even more. I will now try to show this on my own posts.
I have been holding a daily competition for about 3 months. In order to further increase the interaction on the steem blockchain. At first I was voting the posts myself. The curation award I won was very insufficient. However, after a while, people thought that the contest I organized was a quality contest and started to participate in the contest. There was a consensus among the people. The people-to-people consensus attracted the attention of the community manager. The size of the SP amount in my shipments has started to increase. Thus, the curation earnings I got from the post increased.
Now my isolated judgment has turned into a community judgment. The economic benefit of the community judiciary is much greater.
(3) Go to Steemworld.org, check your Upvote value( at the current SP, VP). Take a screenshot. Then go to the Steemit trending page, find a post with a payout of more than $10 but less than $50(Age less than 6 Days 12 hrs). Upvote it. Take screenshots before and after upvote. Similarly, go to another post on the Trending page, find a post with a payout of more than $100( Age less than 6 Days 12 Hrs). Upvote it. Take screenshots before and after upvote. Tell the differences between the two. Which one has produced a greater Upvote value & Curation reward for you with the same resources(SP, VP)? Explain?
Steemworld website has a very useful feature. When I checked my upvote value, I saw it was 0.11 $. If I vote 100% on a post, it will increase the post + $ 0.11. The curation prize I will get should be $ 0.055.
I'll vote 100% on a post between $ 10 and $ 50.
Before Upvote
After Upvote
Difference: 38.43-38.25= 0.18$
The value of $ 0.11 upvote boosted the shipment by + $ 0.18. $ 38.43 vote value equates to approximately 1,100,000 SP. The curation gain is not yet linear enough in this SP range.
Before Upvote
After Upvote
Difference: 329.81-329.29= 0.52$
Pcurator= (1/2) * (√PT) * (√P1-√P0) Δt
PT= Post Payout at the end of 7 days
P0= Post Payout before voting
P1= Post Payout after voting
P0= 329.29
P1= 329.81
PT= 329.81
Δt= 1
Because I voted after the 5th minute.
Ptht= (1/2) * (√329.81) * (√329.81-√329.29)= $0.1301
Thus, I win more curation awards than the upvote value I have.
I voted for a post worth $ 329.29 with 100% upvote. Although the upvote value was $ 0.11, the value of the post was $ 329.81. There was a $ 0.52 difference. This is a really big difference.
The reason for such a difference is that the curation gain starts to increase linearly after a certain SP size.
$ 329.81 equals approximately 8,760,000 SP of power.
The $ 0.11 upvote had some impact on the $ 38 worth of shipment. Much more impact on a $ 328 post with the same upvote value. This is because the increase in the curation reward is much greater after a certain SP size. Because the algorithm in the Steem blockchain emphasizes the importance of community judgment.
Twitter sharing
https://twitter.com/Steemtht/status/1372849664270143489