You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: DO NOT read this post unless you actually understand Hive

in LeoFinance2 years ago

I agree, it happens to some of our votes as well. There's some times for instance we vote up a post by a newcomer that we think would be nice to get to trending as getting new people there every once in a while wouldn't hurt - only to then see like 4-5 different whales stack their votes and then we get people complaining about how it's overrewarded.

A big issue with this is that re-voting removes all your curation rewards so you can't later go "oh this got rewarded a bit much so I'll change my $80 vote into a $10 or $20 vote cause doing so means you'll get 0 curation rewards and just encourage the voters who stacked their votes later with more rewards (as they'll get your share you gave up). I don't mind downvoting them a bit with my personal account of course but it's not as big to make an impact (as downvotes take a portion out of each upvoter rather than just penalize one of them). Thankfully there's already plans to fix re-voting to not cost the voter all of the curation returns in a future hardfork so will be interesting to see how many will start doing it. That is if they care, cause I think many of those who stack their votes just do it real quick and carelessly or are just autovotes that won't be looking back at what the post ended up in rewards. Similar how many don't care enough to downvote certain overrewarded posts in the first place.

It'll be an improvement for those who do care, at least and what exactly that change will do for voting power is hard to tell right now (i.e. if changing a vote from $80 to $20 will give you 75% of that voting power back or if changing from $20 to $80 will only cost you an extra 75% voting power due to the first vote).

Sort:  

"don't just pile votes onto one post" is the mindset I'd love to see more of.

as @cmplxty said here, this seems like a great move for Hive as a whole. May not be quite as profitable for those big bag holders though. Hard to orchestrate something important like that happening consistently.

Thankfully there's already plans to fix re-voting to not cost the voter all of the curation returns in a future hardfork

This sounds amazing @acidyo. I've wondered if something like this would ever happen. Not sure if there would ever be a way to say... undo an accidental 100% vote and change it to 10% without losing 110% of your voting power. Get what I'm saying there? Kind of hard to explain that bit. Pretty sure that is what you were mentioning at the end.

It's a culture thing for sure. We were able to get rid of the bid bot culture so I think we should be able to help persuade the big holders to be a little more balanced with it all, I would hope!

Looking forward for sure to the ability to adjust a vote up or down and not waste the voting power to do it.

Yep, in fact that accident just happened today (if you've looked at trending). It happens, we're human and it's not like we should discourage manual votes that some times may go wrong so I can't wait for this change especially for the error ones.

Oh wow, I see. seaspect must be feeling on top of the world right now.

Looking forward to the change in voting! I wouldn’t mind increasing the vote on some peoples posts but will occasionally not due to wasting voting power since it counts twice.

Hopefully we can change the culture around piling on the votes!