RE: Thoughts on earnings and delegations out
It's the 'problem' for you, yes.
Not only me. It's the problem for everyone, which is why so many people are delegating to bid bots. It's much easier and more lucrative compared to time spent searching for and upvoting content.
It does't matter one bit whether you have 100K SP or 1000. What matters is the percentage of return from the bid bot. It's the same for everyone. So if you can get a 20% return for delegating and doing nothing else, or maybe get a 20% return for being on a site all day long and wading through an ocean of spam and shitposts, why would you not take the "easy" and "guaranteed" returns?
And I should note (with actual numbers) that the curation returns are not comparable to the bid bot returns I'm getting. Prior to delegating, I was earning about 20-40 SP per week from curation. Just in the past week, I have earned 96.68 STEEM through my delegation...plus another 41.761 SBD. And this is with prices and bid bot use on the decline.
So you can congratulate me all you want about "being here early," but it doesn't change the fact that the economic incentives to manually engage are piss-poor. No amount of denial or blaming those who recognize this reality will change it.
So what will you do? Continue watching people tune out and blame them for this place not being what you want it to be? Or hold those people accountable who control the protocol writing and implementation...and who continue making things worse?
It also matters what you compare it to. And when you simply compare your bidbot return to your financial return from curation, you're declaring that the Steem you distribute to other people has no value to you.
Since you don't need sugar-coating I'll just say it straight out: you're being a shit. Given the option to give ten presents to other people or keep five of them for yourself, you're picking the five. Don't go putting the blame on other people when you're evaluating your own incentives that way.
You want to run for witness while literally arguing that the people whose votes you want aren't half as valuable to you as you are, go ahead, but hopefully they will see through that.
I don’t think you even know what you wrote here.
You guys really need to learn how to read and comprehend. What I’m saying is - there is not enough incentive for me and many, many other users to spend my/our time curating content.
Read the writing on the wall. When a large amount of invested users are telling you with their wallets and their feet that there’s not enough incentive to stay powered up, to not delegate, and to curate content, maybe you ought to listen. What the fuck does “giving presents” have to do with investment and economic incentives for desired behavior?
This isn’t a moral debate. It’s not a moral dilemma. We can’t expect everyone to do all the nice things we want and none of the bad things we don’t want without incentivizing them to act accordingly.
So while you and others make this about morality and claim that I’m “being a shit” because you don’t understand economics and behavior, the platform continues to deteriorate. Someday you guys may realize that the protocols have been fucked and need to be corrected. Then again - you may not. It’s really not my problem, to be honest.
Funny. I thought that you and the other people in this thread were “blaming” me and other stakeholders who simply behave in a manner that’s incentivized by our current blockchain protocols. I guess you didn’t recognize that either.
I am a witness. I don’t run for anything. I’m not a worthless politician.
This in turn leads to an exodus of good content posters who are not circle jerking or buying votes, but who were trying to get along by creating content alone and voting for what they actually like.
Their leaving leads to more leaving, and to others frantically looking for alternatives.
The total number of users may be going up, but there's slaughter going on among the ones I follow, and no, that is not just because of Steem price. It's because Steemit isn't working properly for them anymore; it also doesn't work as advertised anymore, which is a huge marketing problem.
It’s not working for most people. One could argue that it hasn’t worked for about 94% of all sign-ups. (Not an accurate number, since sign-ups have been artificially inflated, along with “active users.”) The people who remain are pretty much just here for the money...and how that money is being earned on all fronts is a great indication of the extremely poor health of the platform.
What people apparently fail to realize is that “investment” and having happy, engaged “investors” on Steem is what will draw happy, engaged, and good content creators. But the problem is - the people bitching about how investors are investing aren’t actually listening to or comprehending those investors and their actions.
Whose fault is that? The people buying the tokens and/or powering up and putting positive price pressure on STEEM? Or the ones whining about how they then use that influence in the flawed system? And why are these whiners not speaking out about the critically flawed system, instead of brown-nosing the dev team that has fucked it up and continues to do so?
Strangely, we agree with this.
That IS strange!
I'm not talking about curation.
The example in the post is clear enough. 450 SP is required to gift a commentator a non dust vote. We have 1.1 million accounts on or less than 500 SP.
Why should I support an account who has delegated and dropped below this level? For .05 a day. I could gift them 10 days Bot delegation profits with 1 vote.
It does matter where your SP Is at, it's not worth your time commenting, but is is for over 99% of the platform, who if they tie in with the likes of myself, taraz, and a solid growing community like @helpie, will almost certainly grow faster than delegating out and expecting visitors.
OK. I am, because I’m not interested in posting much at the moment. I’m busy with other things. And curation is the way that investors can earn without delegating and without shitposting and self-voting...which then gets everyone angry again. I’m giving you my own reasons for delegating to help you understand economic incentives...since we’re all making economic decisions here.
The money continues to flow into bid bots because stakeholders can’t earn much from curation, relative to what they can get from a “set it and forget it” bid bot.
I don’t know. What are your reasons for supporting someone? If it’s based on the size of their vote and not on whether or not you like their content, then I’d say you’re doing social media wrong. But that’s my subjective opinion.
Anyway - I’m telling you why large stakeholders don’t care and why many users are delegating to bid bots. So you can be pissed that it’s happening and lash out at everyone involved...or you can hold those accountable who made this shitty system what it is today. If you’re not willing to do the latter, then the former just makes no sense.
I’ll continue speaking out and doing what I can to fix the massive mistakes that have been made and will be made again starting next month with HF20. Because I don’t care about the size of your wallet. I want a system that works for actual “investors”...the ones who add the actual value around here to our Steem currencies. If we aren’t doing anything to make it worthwhile for people to invest, then we should all just cash out now.