You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Self-Voting: Scammy Behavior, Rational ROI, or Something Else?

in #steemit7 years ago

Top 3 things I researched when starting to post in Steemit:
1 - when I write a post, should I choose 50-50 rewards or 100%
2 - what % of voting power should I use
3 - should I vote for my own posts

Most answers seem to be personal choice.

One thing I would like to see done as an improvement would be to limit whale voting power.
As they gain power their max voting percentage could drop. For example they may drop to a max of only 80% per vote. This would allow them to vote more often per day but their single vote would have less power. Especially since the K19 upgrade more votes would be valuable. This may allow them to upvote more quality content (and raise viability to more material ) rather than just content from their inner group.

Darryl

Sort:  

Hey Darryl! Thanks for commenting.

So... this is awkward for me. We were roommates in college. I've now become an "orca" which is one step below a whale. Is it wrong if I upvote your comments as part of my "inner group"? Or is that a benefit I get for earning Steem Power for so long and rewarding my friends?

The 80% cap is an interesting idea, but they can already do that be self-limiting their own voting power. They could vote thousands of times with only a 1% vote, right?

(btw, my question is somewhat rhetorical, I'm going to upvote you anyway because it's also a great comment).

I agree that the larger fish have paid their dues to create a community that people want to join.
I don't disagree with upvoting your inner group as that is how it is currently set up. You play with the hand that you are dealt.

It was just an idea that came up while reading alot of
Comments and posts complaining about votes being given to friends over content.

No matter how a system is set up, there will be those who look for ways to abuse it. Those who use it as intended are the ones who will help new comers flock to Steemit and stay!

The last point, this is important, though I would qualify it by saying that the wisdom developed during the dialogue about these things, and even game theory models and statistical analysis, is how we get more people involved, get them to hold more than spend, and get more of their friends to also join.

Even when there is 'voting circles' not everyone who plays just runs an autovoting bot, and ignoring the entire rest of the platform's userbase. That would be quite strange, really.

I don't think that's wrong. It's a perk, and you are still using it socially to distribute stake (unlike a self vote which only increases the stake of the voter, which is the opposite of distribution as you have not diluted your own stake). If people feel you're going overboard with it, they can counter your votes.

Whale voting power, relative to the rest of us, is now far lower than it used to be. This is part of the reason why we are seeing this. I am not a supporter of the concept of plutocracy, by any means, but essentially HF19 has brought a light upon the issue of self voting, and its effects socially and to the distribution patterns. Which is why it's such a hot topic now.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.30
TRX 0.12
JST 0.033
BTC 64534.17
ETH 3150.15
USDT 1.00
SBD 4.01