You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: 📷 A Whole New Meaning To Going Down Under / Australia Style ! 📷
Nice post, however, I needed to downvote it because at least 3 whale accounts and a good number of other mid-strength accounts were piling on, leading to the post pulling an unreasonable portion for the reward pool. Please do not take this personally as I liked your post and had the whale voting concentration not already been there I would have upvoted it myself.
This is totally unfair ! I work hard on this platform and barely even get anything for my posts as it is ! I finally get something half decent and you take it away from me !? Why dont you go after those that are constantly making money and trending on here !? With the price of steem falling now isnt the time for taking away from peop!e that do alot for this comunity ! I also just did 2 judging compititions by volunteer for nothing back in return , as i help out this platform all the time and ask for nothing back in return ! Are you trying to get me to stop all the work I do because now i feel like im not welcome on the platform !? All I do for everyone , and all the work and blogging and contributing i give here is all for nothing !!!!! Take a good look at those making big money all the time on a daily basis before going after people like me that contribute constantly by also comenting and cureating 24 / 7 !! do you want me to leave!?
Does driving people away really help the platform?
Please review the broken window fallacy
I also just got laid off from work on Feb 3rd !! And dont have enough money to pay my rent because my EI hasnt started coming in full time yet ! So thanks for depressing me even more like my life doesnt suck enough as it is !!and if this is what steemit has come to by taking away from those that do the most and work the hardest to make steemit a fun place to be , then i will take a break from it for awhile and stop 100 percent powering up my account !! But will be sure @smooth that i do a blog about it first so all the newbies know what they have to look forward to !!!!
Since you @smooth are the one making the community clean.. I ask you onething, I post quality stuffs too, and get lots of votes but cant earn a penny...While some of us like @karenmkersie is earning why are you flgging her...If u really want to good for the community stop those who have a lot of steem power and earning without much of quality writtings...And we newbies arent earning anything from giving our valuable knowledge...Support those who deserves not those who have
Look, every penny that was reallocated from Karen's posts went to others such as yours. Maybe not yours specifically, and I'm sorry if you aren't having success here. I truly wish everyone could.
Believe me when I say that downvoting concentrated rewards is not the only thing I am doing and have been doing to try to help the situation for all of the current and future (hopefully much larger) user base, only perhaps the most visible and controversial.
I absolutely appreciate your feedback and it is good to be reminded that there are real people on the platform who are disappointed and frustrated. I continue to hope we can improve their (and your) experience.
Really!!!! Your not going to respond to my comments !?!?! Did you enjoy taking what little money i recived on my post , after I was laid off from my job and my Employment Insurance is not yet coming in yet !!!??? Not to mention thae fact that mostly all of my posts are undervalued on steemit to begin with so when it can be made up a bit yoy whales just decide to take them away anyways !?!?
I have upvoted your post. So please do not take my comment as any form of attack simply because @walden directed me to this post.
Nothing I do with Steemit is outside Steem at this time(except advocating and directing people to posts), all is public; no steemit.chat or streemian etc.. I don't talk about the people on Steemit outside of the Steem blockchain.
Sure, I see this post as having some need to be tagged NSFW...
Sure, Smooth could have added this detail to the list of reasons for his downvote. But, would that have really made a difference?
So, I typically turn to @neoxian if I see the Steem network might need some policing, mostly because neoxian was the first for me to spot downvoting to the point of driving people away from Steemit. And, I always saw @smooth as an overworked manager who would most likely have more important things to do.
But this fight over 25$ has shown me another world... Did Smooth's downvote hurt your reputation score? Why not open with that point on the initial refute, because 25$ is not worth it?
Then we have @fyrstikken and @walden toting the party line like they are super friends with @chitty or @skeptic (Not that I am opposed to that). Just wondering if they are using some kind of Streemian automation system.
Thanks for that ! This truly has nothing to do with the money , its about being downvoted for taking away from the rewards the pool when its only once a month if were lucky that even get a nice reward to begin with ! 3\4 of the time all our posts are undervalued ! Not mention all the other work we do for the community ! And expect nothing in return ! Then when we finally get a small payout even such as 54.00 dollars once a month it gets stomped on ! I could see if i was constantly getting big rewards as some people on here do , on every thing they post like sweetjesse for an example ! They are the ones draining the rewards pool ! Not me , or many of us that this is happening too ! This is about trying to change the system so that its more fare for all of us !! Thank , i truly apreciate your responce ! Steem on !🤗❤✌💙
Am I allowed to be off Steemit occasionally?
I can see you are upset but please read my earlier comment. It addresses your concerns, though perhaps not in precisely the way you might like.
And which by the way I leave as a courtesy when downvoting. I'm not required to do this, and would be perfectly within my rights as a stakeholder to express an opinion via voting without further elaboration. I'm seriously considering abandoning the practice as it is consuming too much of my time to frequently turn a legitimate voting decision into a debate.
Thanks for responding back! Good bye!
Judging individual posts this way is maybe not the best way to go about this. I can well understand flattening out the rewards a bit when somebody consistently makes a lot of money because of a large drone following, but capping the rewards of somebody who makes pennies on average and got lucky once, maybe not a good idea. If you must use your fire, there are bigger fish to fry who seem to be left well alone.
You are doing more harm than good. Please reflect.
Respectfully disagree. Downvoting is part of the system and essential to maintain balance and limit harmful reward concentration.
We need to normalize it and remove the stigma otherwise careless or abusive whale voting that concentrates payouts will (and in many ways has) destroyed the ability of most users to ever earn anything. (I credit @beanz, who, when downvoting posts that I was supporting, made this statement about 'getting rid of the stigma' and I agree. I'd note, by the way, that I never attacked her or criticized her for how she chose to vote, even while disagreeing on the merits).
Numerous suggestions have been made to improve the situation, for example replacing the flag icon with a more neutral downvote icon, removing the pending payout amount (or replacing it with a cold-warm-hot icon) or other changes that will help avoid hurt feelings that occur due to common misunderstandings of the voting process. It is up to the team to implement these or others. One good change that has been made is removing the flag count which, though not in this case, caused hurt feelings when a large number of Sybil flags were placed. More improvement along those lines is needed.
I would like it if the stigma could be removed but we've had this down voting system a long time now and whether a user is old or new or understands what the down vote is we are getting the same bad results.
At this point I think we should be trying alternatives to down voting posts, such as vote negation, where it is the voter who put the post on the trending page when they shouldn't have (in your opinion) who gets down voted.
That way if you don't like the way 3 different accounts voted together on somebody very much loved by the community such as @karenmckersie, you will have to down vote the voters (as your comment suggests you wanted to).
I don't see how that would help. The poster would still see "their" earnings drop from $50 to $30 and feel they have been attacked or slighted. It could be slightly better in terms of allocation of curation rewards but from the poster's perspective, much the same. IMO the only way forward on this is to overcome the stigma, including with some UI changes. Sites like Youtube have a balanced upvote/downvote system and it works. I just looked on Youtube trending and the top 5 have between 60% and 90% upvotes. I imagine those posters feel happy about it, and do not feel attacked because 10-40% felt differently.
The difference it would make would be to hold the voter accountable since the author is not responsible for their post rewards. Curators would have to rethink their curation of too many people disagree with them. Currently it doesn't matter enough when a large amount of SP holders disagree with your vote. Vote negating would make it matter to voters that bit more.
[nesting]
I don't think you understand how vote negation works. If one voter upvotes a post (call this voter A) and a second voter (call this one B, and assume the same vote power as A) negates the first voter, then the upvote is canceled out and the post rewards would drop to the point where they would be if A did not upvote. In fact. the drop is identical to what it is now when B just downvotes. The main difference is that without vote negation, A would still get a portion of the curation rewards and with vote negation would not.
So yes, in effect, the voter is held accountable (and loses curation rewards as a result), but from the perspective of the poster, who is either way not earning as a result of the upvote, it is much the same.
I'm not saying this form of negation is bad necessarily, but it doesn't solve the problem with people being upset when "their" earnings drop.
I completely understand all of that. And in the case of @karenmckersie who is a very confusing target for a downvote the result may well be the same. But adding the accountability to the voter makes the voter rethink, especially if their votes are regularly negated. Currently it's too easy to gain 25% curation rewards from a post or comment that was mainly only voted on by one account.
On a side note, I don't understand why you insist on commenting your reasons for downvotes when they consistently contradict eachother. One minute it's because the post was voted up by one large stake holder, the next minute it's because there were too many stake holders voting for this... If the reason is just "Because I Can" well you don't even have to say that. Let people be the judge of your actions without sugar coating it in contradictory rationalisation.
[nesting]
Frankly your comment here is hostile and offensive. I look at the posts, and the voting, and then I make a decision what, if anything, to do. Often the decision is to take no action. For every post you see me downvote, there are often several others that I looked at and didn't. Now, sometimes the decision is to take action (but not always based on the exact same reason or reasons) and I feel it is a reasonable courtesy to leave a comment letting the poster know why it was done.
It is worth considering that not leaving a reason might be better. It would certainly take less of my time responding to replies to my reason. Or because, in part, by doing the poster a courtesy of explaining why placed the downvote I open up an opportunity for some hostile and aggressive person such as yourself to come along and claim that my different reasons for taking actions on different posts are somehow "contradictory" or that my reasons are actually (according to you) really "rationalizations". I haven't decided whether avoiding this abuse is worth ceasing the courtesy to the poster or not.
Your point about giving voters more of a reason to rethink is a good one. Thank you for that.
Perhaps need to leave a reply to each post that you read but decided to take no action? So people will know how much curation work is done before an action. Just think out loud..
Your comments toward me often come across that way too. But I take it with a pinch of salt. I consider it the nature of communicating criticism through text, a limited form of communication. Neither hostility nor offense was intentional but it's understandable you could be insulted. You've never insulted me personally but I won't lie I've found you insulting of the general community here from time to time. Again, I put it down to the nature of a limited form of digital communication.
When I have the time to be less blunt I'll try. I'm lazy about it sometimes and I can never predict how readers with their own preconceptions will interpret the tone of text.