Vote Less, and Harder, and Profit!
Over
the last month or so I have switched between full manual curating and using Streemian (mostly @rusteemitblog, @xeroc, and a couple of others sometimes) to vote. When I manually curate, I have been moving towards using a full vote strength and voting far less frequently.
As you can see in the above, I almost made a Steem curating this last 7 days. A week ago with the autovoting on, I was making a measly as 0.4 or so per week on curation rewards. Both times I have gone for manual curation and voting bigger and less often, I am making more on rewards.
My diagnosis is that I am a good curator and I think I am because I don't get interested in things very easily. Most of the new posts are entirely uninteresting to me, and so, it seems that out of the ones I find interesting, I often get in early on ones that go on to trend.
I am also of a logically unjustifiable opinion that voting less and voting harder is better for the distribution. I think it just clutters up the blockchain with little votes and especially people who waste their time dividing their Steem Power to run multiple bots to try and somehow get more profits. Well, for me, this strategy does not work. What works is actually reading it myself and voting on it manually, without scaling it.
I am going to continue to work this way on Steem for a while and see how this trends over time.
We can't stop here! This is Whale country!
Manual all the way, thumbs up ;) There are many reasons why this is good beyond our own curating.
Manual curating 8 months and counting! <3
I believe this is how it should be, anyway!
Voted manually :-)
On Steemwhales.com I currently sit one slot behind you in the curation category. I've been manually voting the entire time I've been here. Ranked 650th out of over 50000 accounts isn't bad at all.
even if in reality there is maybe 4000 users, that still puts us far from the median :)
Indeed it does.
I do them all. Steemvoter, streemian(via steemtrail curation group) and manually voting. Needless to say sometimes my voting power gets a little drained. I used to manually vote exclusively and could, similarly as yourself, get high curation rewards for picking what was going to trend early.
I re-prioritize my reasons for curating on a continual basis. I like the auto vote to support the authors I want to encourage. I upvote new authors and comment on their posts to help welcome and encourage their engagement in the community. It also help in picking the authors that will trend next.
It is a lot of fun building connections, I think. :-)
Absolutely, I mostly chew through my feed to find good articles but sometimes when I get more bored I go to the new category view, and look for something good, by someone I don't already follow, upvote it and follow. I probably have been finding one or two good new writers every week for a few weeks now. I don't pretend to be at all objective. I can see stuff that looks like it probably is good (judging by presentation of the summary visible content) but is on a subject I have absolutely no interest in, I don't vote on it just because it is 'technically good'. It also has to be interesting to me.
I also don't go by this 'encourage new users' so much as find the ones who will be good and encourage them. Every person we can get to get the hook into them, you might say it's worth it, but I think instead save that energy for the really exceptional ones and then work them to get them on board. Those people will turn around and do the same thing later, network effects FTW :)
Bots are evil for Steemit, I think.
Thank you for resteeming :) , but I wouldn't say bots are evil , people are giving their own options away and missing out on potential information. It's their choice if they want to rush, or take the slow and steady route.
Maybe.
Good Post.
The main reason I don't join a voting bot is that I don't want ME being associated with some posts, profitable or not