I appreciate these structured initiatives and this explanation, but my point is more along the lines of seeing beyond that to manually engage and follow those outside of your realm. Was there a reason my comment wasn't worth an upvote to reward my engagement and the opportunity to promote your other initiatives? Therein lies some of my point.
For example, your voting power is 99.73% right now. That's a whole lot of wasted firepower. A few big votes around the ecosystem to people who deserve it could make their entire week and give them the motivation and hope you're promoting. It just takes a click of a finger and is a selfless way to give back to the community on top of the other things you've outlined.
I'm a peon on this site and my voting power was in the 40-60% range for 3 months until I got so discouraged with Steemit, I backed off in recent weeks. It wasn't for the price, it was because of the general behavior I see daily across many leaders being for profit vs for community. If we give without expectation of a reward or an ROI, that's where people will truly find value in the platform and it's more likely to succeed in the long run, in my eyes. At least that's what Steem is all about to me.
P.S. - this is not an attack. It's a discussion I'm keen on getting feedback on from you as a top contributor to the blockchain.
Agreed with you, except that keeping one's voting power near 100% isn't "wasting firepower". It's actually the exact opposite. It seems you believe that depleting one's voting power is wise, but keeping it as close to 100% is how you maximize the amount of payouts you can give. At 40%, your upvotes are only giving 40% as much in payouts as they should be. Very selectively upvoting, keeping your voting power in the 90s, is the undisputed gold standard on Steemit! Otherwise great posts : )
"That's a whole lot of wasted firepower. "
How is it wasted? It's programmed to vote at 100% on a timer.
"It just takes a click of a finger"
...and a breach of his fiduciary duty and promise to every delegator, who delegated to the bot explicitly based on Jerry not using it to vote outside the programmed timer.
Per your clarification, it's wasted as it's seemingly only available to those who pay for it. I didn't realize that, per promises and duty to his delegators (paying investors), his account can only vote via the bot, rendering him restricted from manual votes. Do you endorse this? Is this trend from an evangelist the right direction for Steem Power?
I think it's a pretty lousy direction and sends a controlled/centralized banking message to the community, versus a way to give back to people to help it thrive from the bottom up.
Also, how about a sliver of empathy on the other items discussed, or an upvote for any of those who wrote plenty on this string, since your voting power isn't necessarily locked up from manually rewarding for engaging content? You took the time to position your reply with an upvote. Were everyone else's sentiments not worth the slightest gesture if you found it engaging enough to reply? Encouragement goes a long way when appearing to be focused on picking apart only the items you'd like to challenge.
His vote is for sale(what % goes to help projects?), you're as likely to get an upvote from haejin. (Below the belt yes but even giving out 1% upvotes with that SP could help some folks and where are the projects that help them? & Does a % go to advertising in korea?)