You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: A Summary of @randowhale: Statistics for Dummies
Don't underestimate the parabolic growth ...
If you had more votes the impact of randowhale would be much higher.
Don't underestimate the parabolic growth ...
If you had more votes the impact of randowhale would be much higher.
"Parabolic growth"? Please, explain.
At this moment ( soon to be changed - on tuesday to be exact ) the rewards get calculated with rshares².
No, no. Please explain why other upvotes change how much I get from randowhale?
Because, the power of votes get squared to calculate the rewards. ( n^2 )
Explain it like I am a five-year-old.
The author gets 75%, curators get 25%. How are the rewards for the author and curators then calculated? Do you have a link to this information, it's quite interesting.
It's not like:
but
OK (although a link to this info in the white paper would be good).
However, how does this change the income we will get from randowhale? As an author, you will still get 75% of what is listed as the payout on your article.
Yes and that payout gets calculated not linearly but parabolic.
I don't know if that's actually in the whitepaper and it's a bit of a pointless discussion at this time, because it will be changed to linear on Tuesday. Then your estimations would be valid.
Have you not noticed how your votes push the rewards more significantly, when the post already has a high payout ?