You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The Student Has Become the Master
Downvoted to reduce large self-voting SG reward that is being deceptively hidden by voting after first payout, especially when the ability to view 30 day trending posts was removed from the UI.
I consider this to be intentional abuse that is unfortunately being enabled by accounts owned by members of the development team in order to allow a favored few to scam rewards. It is sad to see that Steemit has come to this.
Hello, I can understand this initial response when taken out of context. I would like the opportunity to explain exactly why this was voted after payout. It was not intended to abuse the system or to scam anyone.
Because of the unique reward system of steemit, it has been difficult to find a way to be compensated for my work for steem guild in a way that seems fair to the entire community. I take fairness very seriously and have attempted to balance this with the need to be compensated for my time. The reason I joined steem guild was to help to be part of a “bandaid” that seemed to be required because of the way the reward curve is structured. I sincerely hope that this bandaid will no longer be required and there will be no need for artificial ways to help spread the rewards to many content creators. I genuinely want to help reward as many content creators as possible. I truly believe that will help the platform to grow.
Some influential stake holders thought this guild would help with user retention and needed people to perform this service. In exchange for performing this service, the stakeholders wanted to use the reward system that is in place: votes.
We will never know if the steem guild helped retain authors or not. I can’t prove a negative. I believe it has helped retention others can argue it has not. So I’d prefer to just stick to the issue of rewards.
Over the life of the guild, the number of authors has grown dramatically. So has the amount of time required to perform the tasks of steem guild. I must admit for a very brief period, my rewards matched this increase in time required. But then I stepped back and looked and said, “I have to cut back. I have to take less rewards.” What “less” meant did not get worked out instantly. I tried different things to cut back.I started by posting less often and asking for decreased voting power on my posts. I took those actions before there was any feedback from any community members.
When the community members did provide feedback, three factors were stressed most often:
At this same time, my posts began getting flagged for earning too much on a single post. Therefore, one option which would have been to just post once per week was taken off the table.
I cut back even more on my number of posts and asked for even lower voting power but this still left me on trending.
The reward method you mention was intended to address the three factors mentioned above. In addressing these factors, it also meant that I received much lower rewards than I would have if I simply lowered the voting power and stayed on trending. I even combined this method with posting less often. I tried this method in order to earn less, leave the trending page for other authors, and have less of an effect on curation. This was not a scam intended to unfairly benefit myself.
The reward system on steemit is unique. It is not like anything I have ever operated in. It is not “normal” to be rewarded in votes that affect so many other factors and people. If this were the real world, I would have simply said “I’ll take less money”. On steemit, “taking less vote based rewards” still left me on trending and affected curation. I assure you, if there were buttons that said “cap rewards” and “Not eligible for trending”, I would have clicked those in a heartbeat.
This was an attempt to respond to and be fair to the community. It was not an attempt to scam anyone.