A month ago I started an experiment on Steemit, motivated by the arbitrary use of the flagging feature at that time and by the potential of creating a better rewarding algorithm. The experiment was planned for 10 articles but I decided to stop it after seven. The reason is very much related to the changes brought to the platform by the combined HF 17/18. Specifically, the new 7 days payout window messed up with my initial planning. I had a specific algorithm in mind, which depended on a 24 hours payout window. As frustrated as I am about this change, I can't do anything about it, so I might as well just accept the facts as they are and see what I can do - what conclusions I can draw - from what I already have.

Alas, there isn't much to infer, on top of what I already wrote on the partial conclusions, a couple of weeks ago.

I will try to outline them in a more understandable form:

• if they like the content, people will reward it, regardless of the source (their own pocket or the reward pool)
• if there's no predictability, people will stop putting skin in the game
• if the reward brings in turn other rewards (curation), the rewards will increase in value (people see this as an investment: vote with more money and you will get back more money)

Revisited proposal for YAVAP

YAVAP - Yet Another Voting Algorithm Proposal was described initially in [his post], more than 2 months ago. Here are my additions to it, based on the Fuckup Files experiment:

• content reward should have a mixed structure: partly from people wallet, partly from the rewards pool
• there will be a direct correspondence between personal contribution and the amount drawn from the reward pool, based on a certain ratio, changed every few weeks or months (like the diff in mining).
• curation reward should be based not on the amount drawn by the vote from the rewards pool, but from what user contributes from his own wallet

Here's a simplified formula:

PC = Personal Contribution (what the user is giving away with his vote, from his own wallet)
USP = User Steem Power
RPC = Reward Pool Contribution (the amount which is drawn from the reward pool as a consequence of the vote)
UCR = User Curation Reward (what the user receives as a curation reward)
AR = Author Reward
D = Difficulty Multiplier

RPC = PC * D * (1,000/SP)
AR = PC + RPC
UCR = RPC * D * (10,000/SP)

Example:

PC = 10 Steem
USP = 10,000 (a small dolphin)
D = 0.8
RPC = 10 * 0.8 * (1,000/10,000) = 0.8 Steem
AR = 10 + 0.8 = 10.8 Steem
UCR = 0.8 * 0.8 * (10,000 / 10,000) = 0.64 Steem

The same example, with D changed to be 12.4, and PC 1 Steem

PC = 1 Steem
USP = 10,000 (a small dolphin)
D = 12.4
RPC = 1 * 12.4 * (1,000/10,000) = 1.24 Steem
AR = 1 + 1.24 = 2.24 Steem
UCR = 1.24 * 1.24 * (10,000 / 10,000) = 1.5376 Steem

Main key points:

• D, the "difficulty", will be adjusted by witnesses and included in the blockchain, via a hardfork
• same thing can be done with the dividers used in RPC and UCR (1,000 for RPC and 10,000 for UCR, these values can be changed until we find a reasonable result)
• based on D, the formula can give very different results, so it's up to the community to pick the value which favors the most important thing at that time: encouraging user growth, encouraging ROI for SP holders, etc...
• this formula encourages participation in creating content, creating demand for Steem and glueing Steem Power to something useful.

Waiting for your feedback.

Thank you.

---

I'm a serial entrepreneur, blogger and ultrarunner. You can find me mainly on my blog at Dragos Roua where I write about productivity, business, relationships and running.

Here on Steemit you may stay updated by following me @dragosroua.

---