I pissed H off too many times for him to give me a vote :) I guess he rigs things to try and make something from curation.
I know some people dread getting on trending as it can attract the wrong attention. I think it's fair to trim some excessively rewarded posts to spread them out a bit, but I would hope people are left with what the real community gives them. Downvote trails can be an issue.
It looks like a lot of trending posts are not downvoted. I very rarely get on the top few pages.
Why is it for the whales to judge if a post is excessive? Sounds like a censorship oligarchy, just because someone (who has a lot more money than I do) thinks that I am earning too much money
This is the worst thing about this platform and it makes me not want to onboard people here anymore. I have probobly done way more to bring people to this platform than smooth has, but because hes rich he can control everything and take away half of my income.
It's the same whales (or different ones) who vote for most of the rewards in the first place. Somehow it is perfectly legitimate to get whale upvotes but not whale downvotes? I don't think so.
No one complains about unfair upvotes on their posts.
Exactly. They are happy to take the huge rancho votes. I see haejin is exploiting that to the max on Steem for his own crap with nobody caring. Sad to see how low the old place has sunk. It's a dash for cash there. Hive will never be perfect, but people do actually care about it. The good some whales do may not be obvious.
I just don't want to see people feel they have to give up over losing money they never actually had. They may have good content, but they seem to ignore how Hive works and how others are less fortunate. I do think some big accounts could give less votes to the old guard and boost some of the really creative people who are adding value for a general audience. It's their choice of course.
People take it all pesonally, they don't see the bigger picture. Also, the supply is down over 1M now :)
It is a lack of understanding, but when people have been here four years, is that lack of understanding still understandable?
You would think they would know better, but some people don't actually bother looking at any technical posts. They just see money rolling in and ignorance is bliss ;)
I think removing the effect of rancho/haejin votes is fair as we know he doesn't give a shit about quality. I have seen a couple of those affected saying they are leaving despite having done really well from Hive. One posts the same to Steem and makes 20c each time. They don't seem to appreciate how lucky they have been and how the reward distribution is skewed. I keep saying Hive is not fair, but it can do good.
Thanks for what you do.
Er, this is how Hive works. People are happy to take the free money from votes by big accounts, but if those same voters decide to adjust rewards down it's a disaster. Smooth has stated his reasons and its not an all out attack on any one person. I've been downvoted plenty of times. Get over it and move on.
I see you've had huge rewards thanks to rancho. It's not because haejin actually reads your posts.
Too much drama!
Yeah, we get upvoted because people like our stuff. We are fine with that. If we got downvoted because someone had some issue with our content, that would be something we could deal with, but the fact that they downvoted us for no other reason than they dont want us to make as much money as they do is very upsetting and a bad mechanic on this platform
Are you fine with people just upvoting you to get the curation rewards? If they never comment then you don't know their motivation. Downvoting to adjust rewards was in the Steem white paper from the very start, so I assume you were aware that is part of the mechanics of the platform. What you have been making it not typical at all and I know plenty of creative people who make a lot less and probably work just as hard. Hive is not 'fair'.
The whales have generally invested money and time in the platform. They could easily have left when things were not looking great, but they have stuck with us. You may not see all the good they do. There can be selfish whales too.
I expect you can continue to earn well if you stick with it, but stakeholders are allowed to adjust your rewards. I suspect it has a lot to do with ranchorelaxo, whoever that is.
Well it very often has absolutely nothing to do with rancho because I don't get rancho votes but have gotten three downvotes in a row from smooth, edicted got 4 in a row, and I have checked and a plethora of his downvotes are not countering rancho, while at the very same time he upvotes other rancho content, it's time people stop peddling this misconception that his votes are being given out to counter ranchorelaxo and haejin whoever they are.
If people truly think rewards are disproportionate, go upvote small payout posts, not punish users for being rewarded for good content that oftentimes has users who like it so much they leave tips, even reblogged posts that have good engagement! As it is, smooth has proven he downvotes not only to adjust rewards, but also based purely on content he doesn't like, when he downvotes those who challenge his methods, even when such posts are not making big rewards at all...
It may be written into the white paper / code / whatever, that doesn't make it good or honorable or beneficial to the growth of the platform. Many laws in many countries make immoral behavior 'legal', but it doesn't make it right.
People who work hard to make both original and well-sourced content are leaving, people are discouraging potential new members from joining, and people who see such behavior as unwelcoming are going elsewhere because of such behavior, and if the other whales and devs and programmers don't do something to discourage this as a norm or get rid of the built in function that encourages such power abuse, this platform will implode or at the least become stagnant and barren of the growth it initially had. I hope people who truly care about growth and sustainability of this blockchain that has much potential can see that.
Well I still think downvotes need to be more accepted as normal on Hive. I was making guesses at what smooth was doing, but you can ask him for yourself. Maybe he disagrees with your opinions. At least you can express them freely here and earn.
I see your posts still made far more than most people, so is it really so bad, whatever the reason? It would look better if some of those 'old guard' who always make a lot from auto votes also got some big downvotes to adjust their rewards.
Others may see you complaining when you make $50+ and they are lucky to get $5 even when their content is great. What counts as 'fair'? Hive is a tiny community for now, but I do want to see it grow. That can be driven by a better distribution of rewards.
!ENGAGE 20
Thanks for your thoughtful response, and I will also elaborate and respond to some of your thoughts and concerns on the matter.
First off, this isn't about me, I was only made aware of smooth downvotes to lower rewards because of his hitting my posts multiple times in a row causing me to research the issue, but this is a prolific pattern and he has taken rewards down on many, many other posts, and downvotes by him and others is driving people from the platform, that is why I am trying to raise awareness.
I and many others have asked him and only receive generic answers about subjective lowering of rewards, but then downvote actions contradict that statement because he gives out punitive downvotes on posts that challenge the ethics of downvoting when they aren't high payout posts and other patterns are pretty clear as well.
Because of this lack of transparency and refusal to make clear the reasoning behind his tactics, I hear many theorize as to why smooth downvotes, and based on my research these reasons are not the case very much of the time, so I am just attempting to share what I have learned so people can stop spreading these misconceptions, for it isn't just you, many others are under the impression he is downvoting to counter autovotes, but if you look at the biggest voters on my posts, they are not autovotes, they don't vote all of my posts, and their vote weight is adjusted from post to post.
Also, I am not complaining about my payout rewards, I feel blessed to often get amazing rewards on here, that was not always the case for a long time, and it was only due to consistent engagement and posting, countless hours of research and writing and video creation involved on hundreds of posts to reach that point, so sorry if I don't feel that if others want to support my work, I shouldn't get what they want to award me based upon their own discretion.
If the point is to cap rewards at a certain payout, then cap rewards with the code so nobody can make more than $50 or $100 or whatever limit is decided, but as it is tons of people frequently make huge payouts over $100 and never get a downvote by smooth, while many others get downvotes with posts under $100 that weren't even on trending.
I wish I had more hive power to reward those people I support who make less than me, I often reblog what are in my opinion exceptional posts, but I am not financially rich, and crypto 'donations' are my primary means of income at the moment, so yes it is demoralizing when a whale comes along and on multiple posts in a row dings rewards with -$20 to -$40 downvotes (even higher for others) without any explanation as to why accompanying it in the comments, despite the posts having tips, comments, reblogs and clearly are supported by many real people who wanted to support the content with their wallets. Isn't the possibility to eventually gain a following and get higher rewards an incentive to be worked towards and supported in order to encourage growth, rather than something that is shunned for most, but encouraged for others in the 'in crowd')?
This isn't about the amount of money being rewarded or diminished by votes, this is about the fact that whales can come along and take away rewards that others have consciously decided to give users based on their own choice and use of power based on their own investment in the platform, and the fact that this is done to so many others and not just myself.
'better distribution of rewards' can be accomplished by whales upvoting those small $1-5 posts with great content that you reference here, but that is absolutely not what is happening in this case, and this is what I take issue with, that the supposed need for downvotes does not match up with the reality of how downvotes and upvotes are actually given out by these downvoters. Instead of supporting vastly under-rewarded content, the few upvotes given to others by smooth are dished out to high payout trending posts (from what I have seen, there may be a few exceptions, but he downvotes far more than upvotes apart from posts funding his own project), with all the rest going to his own project by repeat voting on spam comments which earning go to his hbd-stabilizer account, and from which he rakes in curation rewards. So I do not buy the claim that 'better distribution of rewards' is driving smooth downvotes, on the contrary, and I do not see downvotes as accomplishing better distribution of rewards at all, because the only way the best distribution can be accomplished is by people supporting and sharing good under-rewarded content, not punishing users for being well rewarded for great content while others who spend much less time and energy on posts are making even higher rewards at the very same time.
To even say that a few Hive elitists should, due solely because of their immense holdings in Hive, have the ability to determine what is and is not acceptable payout, and be in charge of what constitutes 'better distribution of rewards', is tyrannical at its root, extremely subjective determination that will vary from user to user (with vast majority of users not having the stake to weigh in or counter downvote they disagree with) and it is the reason such behavior is driving users away. This alone should cause all supporters of downvotes to re-think their position, because it is driving users making good content to other platforms. That is a far bigger concern to me and many others attempting to raise awareness and spark debate on this issue, than getting slightly lower rewards on a couple of posts. If you think that's what this is all about, you have misread my intentions, and hopefully I have now made them clear.
I think what can drive growth on here is a friendlier and healthier environment that encourages good rewards for good content, instead of penalizing and discouraging it with rampant subjective downvoting by users who refuse to clearly lay out the reasons for downvotes and who refuse to leave explanatory comments in the posts they downvote. I would say a great step in the right direction would be to only allow downvote if accompanied by a post explaining reason for downvote, and also a function requiring the downvoter to manually select the reason for downvote from the list of 4 main reasons given. Next step remove 'disagreement over rewards' as a valid reason, it generally only serves as cover for punitive downvotes based on disagreement of opinion and encourages power abuse. My personal proposal would be to give every user equal downvote value, the only way to harness 'wisdom of the crowd' in flagging content, so that hive power weight amount only determines upvote value, while all users have an equal say when it comes to flagging and determining 'proper' distribution of rewards, as obviously there will be disagreement of opinion over what constitutes best distribution possible, and if everyone had an equal say, it would make things much more fair it would seem. No doubt such a function will never get implemented, but hey, it's worth throwing ideas out there in hopes of changing something in some way so as to help retain some of the users who are on the fence at this moment about leaving in response to rampant downvoter abuse, not only by smooth but a small number of others as well.
ENGAGEtokens.It shakes out the weak hands.
If you surrender the field, they have won.
It shouldn’t be!!!!! This guy especially is meant to be a witness no? They should be examples and he’s a bully. Who is he to decide what’s too much? A lot of creatives are not working since last March. This is a great platform for them to actually make some income not just a coffee like it is for some.
Maybe we should get the pll we invite elsewhere now.
Trust me this won’t end well for this platform they have annoued one too many ppl. Being downvoted and censored on whim is going to piss a lot of ppl off especially freedom loving creatives. It doesn’t matter how much the post is if it was 1 dollar voted down to 50 c I would feel the exact same.
No more soup for you - The Hive Soup Nazi.
How can you even think it’s ok for people to live in fear of their post trending. There are some amazing people and communities on this platform but that is toxic as hell. The fact people don’t recognise its toxic means they have already been conditioned into fear and limited freedom. They should be grateful if the witness allows them half their post they earnt. Seriously f that.
I don't want people to live in fear, but you are making a big deal of the one downvote you had from smooth. You have not done badly otherwise. Many talented people are not getting any big votes.
I know some people always do really well because of the connections they have made. I'm grateful for the support I get. If the odd post got downvoted like yours it would not be the end of the world.
Hive is not 'fair', but it can still do good.
It's not an odd vote here and there, it's not about being angry at a downvote on a post of ours, it is about a pattern of daily downvotes, often hitting particular users time and time again, often hitting users on their one lucky trending post who ordinarily make peanuts. It's not about 'fair', it's about what is good and right, it's about a healthy friendly platform, and this behavior creates a toxic environment that is chasing good people away. Defend it all you like, it doesn't make it any more honorable, and the same applies for small payout posts losing half their rewards to smaller downvotes.
It's the nature of the behavior that's the issue here, particularly downvotes not accompanied by comments explaining why the downvote was given to a post, and although it is not the end of the world, it may be the end of a thriving hive blockchain.
Those of us who are regularly downvoted all the time by a variety of users for voicing politically incorrect views understand the scope of this issue, it's happened since before the hive fork, it's never ending, and it is easy to see that certain users and content is targeted far more than others for the content not level of rewards. Maybe you don't see this because you don't make content these whales and curation trails of downvoters out there disapprove of and police rewards on.
It’s not just me tho, it’s the amount of people this is happening to is over the whole platform. It’s clearly a targeted attack, to stop any smaller people attaining anything because the already rich people think we ‘got enough’. again if it was a random spammer doing it fair play, what can you say. But this is a WITNESS who’s working with other witnesses to take away people’s money they fairly earnt because they don’t think we ‘justfiy’ It. Some of the people doing this, cause it’s not just smooth, are the ppl who laughed at newbies in 2017 in steemit chat room 2 and continually threatened to take them down to rep one and demolish them for fun. They voted each other up and didn’t want any new people to get anywhere they spent the whole day laughing at them and sharing their posts between one another and deciding who to target.