Some quick basics on my thoughts on curation and vote selling with a few examples here and there.
Not much more to say about it here in text I suppose as the video ended up being longer than I planned on.
Sending most of the author rewards to @commentrewarder and @zing.fund.
Bidbots and vote sellers want to double-dip. They already get rewarded for curation, but they want you to pay them for a vote that isn't guaranteed to even return the value you gave away. It's most beneficial to the seller, and perhaps benefits the buyer, but it dilutes the reward pool from organic curation.
edit and there you were, saying what I was typing right after I hit the reply button. Shows me what I get for not listening all the way through first.
Yeah I rambled on and sidetracked for quite a bit there, lol.
@acidyo, I paid out 16.968 HIVE and 3.845 HBD to reward 13 comments in this discussion thread.
I was in Steemit when the bidbots started to multiply. I think in that time the priority was to attract investors over the user engagement. Decreasing the curator time window and increasing the curation rewards worsened the situation.
I am glad that the pay per vote has decreased. I think the community should keep working detecting that practices and nullify them using downvotes. The purpose of curation is to find and promote quality content, not to reward Hive holding. Investors should have a return, but not by selling votes.
I promise never to burn Zing for you in exchange of upvotes... Gotta hodl them for alts season.
Good point about people sending hive directly to exchanges using others memos for possible vote buying. Never thought of that.
So glad you're discussing this man, I'm learning some history here lol. Didn't really know that much vote selling stuff was going on then. It's good we've got the half system with HBD and HP, I'm naturally growing the HP fast organically. I've started the HBD savings yesterday on I move
Greetings, I tried watching the video on YouTube with subtitles, but I don't think it's translated correctly into Spanish. However, from the comments, I get a sense of what they're talking about. I hope everything is resolved for the good of the community. I'm a supporter of manual voting and real interaction with users. From my point of view, automatic voting is fine if used conscientiously and with users we know aren't abusive. I believe that if we all work towards a better platform, things will always work well. That's my humble opinion.
I think one of the main mistakes is that it thinks I'm saying boats instead of votes :P
JJJJJJAAAAA Yes, on YouTube, it cost me very much, some because words of the subtitles make no sense. And it becomes difficult for those who do not handle the English language. And you did not do us the favor of placing words in your post. Many of Spanish we read you too.
the CC works quite well in english, aside from a few words here and there, so I figured maybe the auto translation would work well too
Greetings, my support partner, I love seeing this. I've learned to look at Hive, both the right way and the wrong way, and it's good to know. I'm glad. I apologize for my translator if there are any inconsistencies. But what I want to make clear is that I appreciate your effort to improve everything.
Thanks for this updates
It’s an eye opener…before now I didn’t understand all about the vote buying but now I have a clearer picture…buying votes like you said would leave most genuine authors from getting rewarded…it’s worth fighting… keep up the good work with the team
I remember seeing a project saying "burn x tokens to get a vote", meh
I also seen community requesting mandatory to post to have a certain account set as beneficiary in all posts, quite obvious that the big community account would vote the posts to earn that % by then...
You mention a bot era in the past, what happened and how was stopped?
Basically everyone was forced to start selling votes as the first big accounts who started were earning almost 2x more rewards. I think this started when curation changes occurred such as linear curve, I.e. a vote represented a fixed amount of rewards along with the change from 75% author and 25% curator to 50/50. Lasted for quite a long time, this was also why we created ocdb which worked as a more selective bid bot, it had a whitelist of users, only those could buy votes from us, they were also all profitable but the project itself didn't make any profit, which most other bid bots did.
Then we introduced the 25% downvote mana pool giving accounts 2.5 daily "free downvotes" because before that if you wanted to downvote it cost you regular voting mana meaning those downvoting forfeited curation returns.
A few projects then started downvoting bought votes, making them not profitable for the author and after a little bit of drama here and there everyone kind of agreed to switch to curation.
That sounds quite bad, not really tempting to join... I think the new mana for downvote made the big change otherwise you lose voting mana (hence rewards) for nothing beside fighting abuse, not sure many would have done so
This is good education, but with the lack of YouTube content talking about Hive it might be better to focus on positive aspects of Hive and why people might want to come to Hive vs going over some of the more negative things about Hive...
You're definitely right and not to worry, I'm quite done talking about this at this point. For what youtube is concerned, I plan on making videos more often so once hopefully traffic other than hivers start showing up there these recent ones will just be a few of many.
You explained it very well. I really learned something new. The part about vote selling really hit me. Someone must think twice before chasing the easy earning.
Very clear & good explanation i think.
i read some of the recent posts by @freecompliments, and noticed he was using ad-hominems directed toward you (but I didn't point that out to him, until now) and from what he said lead me to think (I didn't open links to the conversations with you, so am not sure) you had been too.
i think it would be good in instances such as that one, if both the downvoter & the downvotee were to be very careful in the choices of words used.
Checking the meaning of "ad-hominem" & "fallacy" (https://practicalpie.com/ad-hominem-fallacy/ ) for example, and being aware of and attempting to use "Non-Violent Communication", aka NVC (as taught by Marshall Rosenburg) could be very helpful in resolving conflicts which sometimes results in users quitting Hive.
Image Source:
https://nonviolentcommunication.com/learn-nonviolent-communication/nvc-conflict-resolution/
Peace & Love
Atma
Am I correct when I say, most of these projects are changing their business models?
I was reading through pharesim's post, and it seems like the wind is shifting. And, luckily for us, for Hive, we seem to be avoiding another downvote war. Which, at these prices can't be that great.
Ya'll make it sound like a few downvotes here and there are that bad when some of these projects have been feasting on delegations and higher apr than regular stakeholders and authors not participating in such schemes for years now. It's weird to me how many keep defending this shit and underplaying their effects while trying to make us who still care about curation out to be the assholes making life hard for the leeches.
c'mon bro, that's not a fair thing to say. I challenge you to find a single post, comment or soundbite where I called you or pharesim an asshole.
I'm attempting to live in reality. Life is compromise. People are people.
I'm serious, the podcast should be out soon. You find me a part when I called you or pharesim assholes or I defended leeching and I'll eat my words and apologize to you publicly.
I didn't say you, but people who've been here long enough to see what we've gone through in the past with vote selling shouldn't be all that neutral and trying to play nice with both sides either imo. There were people who tried to play both sides during the centralisation of the chain as well instead of calling shit for what it was.
I'm not neutral on vote selling. I will be putting out "my position" on it later today. I think it's like smoking cigarettes. I can't stop you from doing it, but don't expect me to applaud you. You know this. (i mean, not you, the vote buyer/seller)
The people that acted neutral with Justin's takeover. Some were just confused, but some of them lacked resolve. FOMO of a kind. Honestly, the only person I feel bad for "losing" is exyle, who I always thought, and still do, is a great dude. But all the rest of judases, couldn't care less.
I'm curious to what extent it would affect the participation of quality content providers who opt for other, usually centralized, platforms, if we had curation without any vote selling?
Hmm can you form the question in a different way? Kinda hard to understand it
👍
hi