One thing I deem to be an issue and have given a lot of thought is that it's easy on this platform and free (due to feeless transactions) to maintain a high amount of APR on your curation rewards through no effort. This is partly cause there aren't many downvotes active, no one likes doing them and no one likes receiving them, etc, I'm not going to get into that in this post but mentioning it cause that could theoretically be the one reason to consider manual curation/trailing manual votes/delegating to manual curation rather than choosing autovotes/trailing autovotes/etc.
Over time we've noticed that while autovotes are great and I'm sure have caused a lot of retention over the years, they've also been found to reward a lot of lazy content, authors who get used to them and post for the sake of posting and cashing in those autovotes. I don't think I need to explain too much the negative aspects of autovotes and why most of the good ones are from those who are still very active and maintain their autovote list and check up on them from time to time - or at least are there to accept hints when someone is reaching out to let them know if some are being misused.
Lastly there's also votes that don't have a lot of consideration, they may be manual as well but mostly refer to autovotes. We've seen this with a few accounts who don't care much about their APR or haven't been around to find out how the rules of curation have changedwhich causes a lot of other accounts to "front-run". This potentially means that there may even be autovotes/trails that take no effort from the voters and end up with a higher than the default 8.5% curation APR.
Point being, we all know that manual curation takes effort but the incentives to do so are close to none. Of course there are hidden "incentives" such as making sure this place grows, stake is distributed wide and fairly, but with there being a lot of work behind the votes (10x per day, more if you care to spread it further) it's understandable that many give up and look for ways to automate them while still maintaining the same returns and there's plenty of options to choose from.
I've heard many saying "well if the chain allows it then what can you do" and they're right, there is nothing one can do because determining if a vote is manual or auto is close to impossible. Right now it's not hard to distinguish between them because it hasn't been challenged, but if it ever were the autovote programs would become more clever such as voting in more random patterns, percentages, to mimic manual voting, same could be done with trails on hive.vote if there is a demand. Even if the front-ends would start adding captchas or things to prevent this kind of voting, most of it happens on the "back-end" on the chain directly through programs so this roadblock wouldn't affect them at all and just annoy the few manual voters we have left.
There's many who then also go the extra mile to maximize on their post rewards as I've seen a few cases lately due to the ease of setting up autovotes in the form of trading votes with other people so they're utilizing most of their own votes towards themselves rather than putting them to use for curation and proof of brain, but again this post isn't about that so I'll leave this part for another time.
Point being, those who vote manually put in effort, are often better with their votes but there is no extra rewards for them compared to others not doing so. You may wonder what the problem is here but similar to vote-trading the amount of effort that goes into manual voting not being rewarded means that those doing nothing/going against PoB keep earning more/easier than those putting in work which isn't great. I'm not sure what % of current powered up stake is voting manually compared through auto but it's to no surprise that if you can get away with getting the same returns with no effort, many would do it and many have, do and will.
So aside from downvoting which at the end of the day isn't the best solution as it also affects authors' post rewards and would require more consistent adjusting of rewards for those on auto to even notice/care about changing their ways, many would probably not even bother and be okay with taking less APR considering the alternative means trying to pick 10 daily posts to upvote daily or entrusting their stake with curation services that return rewards if they're planning on going afk for a while and aren't sure if the service will be around as long.
Now you may be wondering, okay but what can we do to reward manual voting more in terms of APR?
Would this encourage more people to join in?
That's the possible million dollar question here that I've been thinking about a lot lately so here are some thoughts.
As you may know I run a pretty big curation project, and ever since the day we went back to the linear curve and everyone/most decided to stop this whole big bot fiasco, with some needing a little push, we shifted away from our non-profit bid bot we had at the time with a curated whitelist of users who could use it, towards fully manual curation. A lot has changed over time and things have evolved and you don't have to trust just me that votes have remained manually cast as there's tons of users involved in our project nowadays that can verify it. Okay so now that we know OCD is manual and remains that way for now, what is the next step?
Similar to OCD, if there are other projects out there that can verify/show proof of manual curation having been used in the past and it continuously being the case, we can now determine that this stake is being used manually. There are of course other individual stakeholders doing so as well outside of curation/delegation projects with some running hybrid manual/auto, but it's going to be difficult to enforce that kind of commitment platform-wide.
The idea would be that stake/delegations/curation that is being used towards manual curation ought to receive some kind of extra rewards. The big question is how.
Going for a DHF proposal seems out there because all stakeholders would need to trust those asking for funding that that's what it's being used for and will remain to be used that way. It's also a bit icky cause many would of course prefer some other solutions where stake isn't being taken from "everyone" through the DHF to reward a certain few. I'm not saying it's impossible or that the outcome wouldn't be worth it (if this would lead more active stake to be used manually spread over many projects/entities) but it's quite an expensive trial with uncertain outcome in a space where the same rewards could potentially be used for many other things to bring value to the ecosystem (such as marketing/onboarding/etc). There are in general a lot of things to consider here so I kind of skipped this step completely and looked elsewhere.
Okay, but what else is there?
The reason I've been thinking a lot about this but ran into walls most of the time and why I decided to write this post now as there's a little glimmer of hope is due to this. We're in the process of creating a new way to onboard people from #web2 through their web2 accounts connected to hiveposh.com and at the same time planning on giving people more reasons to visit the website a bit more often than they may do now when they just register and are done with it. This is to eventually start generating some adrevenue from traffic, adrevenue that was initially thought to be used towards POSH buy pressure but revenue that could potentially be used for more things if the numbers start adding up over time. At first it seemed unfair to take adrevenue from a standalone project like POSH but considering we'll be using ocd/ocdb's account token credits, which are mainly generated thanks to delegators delegating HP and RC to it which has enabled our manual curation, maybe it could make up for grabbing some of that revenue to feed back to the delegators in hopes for higher APR.
This would mean that there then would be an additional source of income/generation from the outside, being siphoned back into the hive ecosystem to reward those who are using their stake towards manual curation. If enough revenue is generated, enough incentives exist to generate the revenue, it could potentially lead to there being more rewards than auto-voting/trailing. Along with other small things like beneficiary cut for onboarders/account creators as we're already doing through hiveonboard (even though it's only 1% towards the account that gave away the free Hive account) it could over time add up.
While I've of course mostly thought about my own curation project with this idea, it doesn't mean others would be shut out from doing the same, if there's trust that certain projects that work similarly to ocd I wouldn't mind inviting them in and sharing the revenue with them or they could create their own solutions to attempt to generate additional revenue to encourage people to delegate their stake to them which goes towards manual curation to take away more voting power from auto/trail voting. Even if it didn't it wouldn't hurt to reward those who effectively make sure stake is being cast and distributed well more.
Needless to say the idea with adrevenue is still quite unrealistic as our userbase is small and generation wouldn't net in a lot, we've seen that even with Leofinance there wasn't too much adrevenue being generated aside from maybe a few weeks at ATH of Leo/Hive when there was a lot more traffic. Point is though that we can start working towards it and with all of us being and staying here cause we believe in the tech, the coin and think it's inevitable that traffic will eventually come, it wouldn't hurt to be ready to make the most out of it then and direct that revenue towards that which has brought the most value to Hive. While most of it would still go towards POSH and its concept of rewarding those directly sharing our links and bringing people to our ecosystem from #web2, part of it could be used towards rewarding manual curation at least since that stake is what enabled POSH to generate free Hive accounts for #web2 users among other things.
Either way, just some thoughts written down to give those who bothered reading all this an idea of what I've been thinking about lately and how I may go about it. I of course also wouldn't mind if others opted into doing something similar based off of this post as it may all be a win for Hive, although maybe don't do this if your main goal is to reward autovoting/trails instead. :P
~~~ embed:1635995224127275010 twitter metadata:MTgyMTQ5NzR8fGh0dHBzOi8vdHdpdHRlci5jb20vMTgyMTQ5NzQvc3RhdHVzLzE2MzU5OTUyMjQxMjcyNzUwMTB8 ~~~
~~~ embed:1636055347507888128 twitter metadata:ODYzOTEyNTQ2fHxodHRwczovL3R3aXR0ZXIuY29tLzg2MzkxMjU0Ni9zdGF0dXMvMTYzNjA1NTM0NzUwNzg4ODEyOHw= ~~~
~~~ embed:1636103842440806400 twitter metadata:MTQ1MTM3MzAxMTAxODMzODMwNHx8aHR0cHM6Ly90d2l0dGVyLmNvbS8xNDUxMzczMDExMDE4MzM4MzA0L3N0YXR1cy8xNjM2MTAzODQyNDQwODA2NDAwfA== ~~~
The rewards earned on this comment will go directly to the people( @shiftrox, @joanstewart, @cageon360, @celi130, @gwajnberg ) sharing the post on Twitter as long as they are registered with @poshtoken. Sign up at https://hiveposh.com.
I try to do a mixture of both. I have some autovotes for sure, but I also do a lot of manual curation. I think what really separates the two is the number of comments. If you look at my account you will see that there are a ton of comments. I know there are a lot of whale accounts that just auto vote and never comment, but comments are where the real communities are built I think. I guess I feel I can justify my use of autovoting because I am still actively participating on the chain via comments and some manual curation. If I were just autovoting and not commenting, then it might be a different story. The two really go hand in hand for me.
I have nothing against people using autovotes if they're "active", as this will mean they'll notice if some of their votes have been cast on content they wouldn't agree with any longer being rewarded. Main issue is those who set things up and go AFK, over time if they checked back in and noticed that there's this new thing now that if you delegate to this project you're getting a lot more APR than the usual 8.5% you've been used to, and if that APR is coming from outside and through projects doing things manually, keeping authors in check, making sure it takes more effort to earn Hive, etc, it's all a win for everyone involved in my opinion.
I know many active members who do great autovoting/hybrid voting as well, some times I may notice a vote on some authors I don't agree with and see that they've been lacking in content/quality/engagement/effort for a while I may ask them to reconsider, if they don't then you know there's always downvotes in the extreme cases but most of the time it doesn't come to that. Other times I see it and I have no other option than to downvote cause the autovoters aren't reachable anywhere.
Yeah, those are some really good points. The benefits of delegation these days are a far cry from where they were when I first started on here five years ago. So many options with great manual curation efforts. The sad thing is, I look at my rewards sometimes and think if it weren't for autovotes, I wouldn't be getting anything. I don't feel that my content is low quality or phoned in either. It's just a matter of catching the right eyes I guess.
I felt like that at one point with the exception of the people running the communities I posted the content in. The only thing that I was able to do to fix it was start commenting and upvoting on quality content of a lot of small accounts. Over time, that gave me more new connections - and more human beings actually reading my posts, which was the point of writing them.
Yeah, I do my fair share of commenting. I think I hit something like 37,000 the other day. I got an alert from the system.
That's more than I have! I'd hoped to hit 20k by January but it just didn't happen 😢 I need to learn how to live without sleep!!!
I don't recommend that at all, you will burn out for sure. Just take your time, you will get there.
The automatic votes are really good for when we don't have much time, although the risk of lazy content to receive them is great and it certainly happens.
I myself do not deny that I receive some, they are automated and carried out once a day, but I obviously do not take advantage of this, once in a while I make 2 posts in one day and I do not worry about whether they will come or not, as well as I don't think it's right to make lazy content to receive them.
I prefer to see responsibly that this is something that we have achieved in some way with our work here and that we should be careful about using it. With big powers come big responsabilities.
About voting manually, I agree that it is super laborious, but it is also interesting, we can stop to read a good content and understand what the author wanted to tell us, in addition to also preventing us from voting for something that makes no sense or does not add up in nothing.
I'm a big fan of manual voting, but then I'm reading posts all the time. I do follow a trail from an account I control, but that only gives 10% votes. I can give over a dollar, so I try to make it count. I won't give much to posts that already have good rewards and I don't worry about my curation rewards. I do okay anyway. I do benefit from auto votes, but I want people to actually read my posts and engage.
Engagement is vital. New people may stick around even if they don't make much if it's a fun experience.
I do think there should be options for all kinds of user, including those who just want the income, but Hive needs to be seen to encourage quality content if it is to succeed.
They're also less likely to spam. If you've made friends, you'll be more likely to want to post something interesting to share!
It's been so long since I've stopped doing all my curation automatically. At this point, manually curating is just a part of my day. I love using lists on PeakD to organize who I vote for. If one list has less activity than normal, I just jump to another one so that I never have to worry about not using my daily votes. I enjoy it and wouldn't have it any other way now. It's really not that hard to do once you get in the habit of it.
If there ended up being a way to receive an additional reward just for doing what I'm already going to continue doing, then I'm all for it. It really does seem like a difficult task to figure out a way to verify which votes are manual and which are auto. Perhaps one of the popular front-ends such as PeakD or Ecency could implement a feature that somehow keeps track of when a manual vote goes out. I know Ecency already rewards its users with Ecency points just for using the app, so the data is already there. You of course don't get the points for auto votes.
You've got some good ideas too and I'm sure that just putting this out there will encourage some minds to consider possible changes that could help further encourage manual curation.
Your post was my last upvote for today (yes, I agree with most of what you wrote), and with this upvote my voting mana is down to about 64 % now.
This way at least I avoid to reach 100 % too soon again (I keep doing two or three manual 'voting packages' per week).
Hello @acidyo, sorry to tag you, I just do it that you notice that I reply again to the same topic.
The downvotes are a really delicate topic.
On the one hand you might be surprised that I actually agree that there are not enough downvotes.
On the other hand it remains a fact that (if justified or not) most users take downvotes personally (and well, of course quite some downvotes are meant personal).
Then the downvoter gets attacked verbally and the downvoted 'victim' feels attacked unjustifiably. Not a nice situation for both of them.
My newest idea concerning this dilemma would be to interpose an AI or an algorithm which tries to decide based on objective criteria if a downvote would be justified or not: if anybody feels to downvote a post or comment they would inform the AI together with a reason (plagiarism, spam, overvalued, containing threats etc.). If the AI would agree to the downvote the downvoter would have a reason to argue that their downvote wasn't just a personal attack on a user. It sounds complicated but actually could encourage downvotes (and discourage - or even prevent(?) - personal attacks).
The AI would not downvote itself, just serve as kind of an arbiter.
If someone downvotes against the suggestion of the AI the community could counter this with upvotes then (the other option would be that downvotes against the decision of the AI wouldn't be possible at all).
An alternative to the AI would be a council of respected, well known users (not only whales, and all given the same voting power within the council!) which would themselves get rewarded for doing the hard work to act as arbiters.
These two ideas might both still be unformed, but I think they show into the right direction.
Here is my testimony to perhaps advance your reflection: I arrived here almost 2 months ago, a novice in all things blockhain and crypto, I only vote manually (even if for lack of time I would be tempted to use an automatic vote). Voting manually forces me to read the articles, to subscribe to a lot of accounts that interested me, which allows me to understand the ecosystem better and better.
As a newbee, it is indeed sometimes discouraging to see that an article published by an "oldie" gets a large amount of automated votes immediately.
However, I am encouraged by the automated votes on my posts (I have quite a few already :) thank you!), even though I know that they are automations and that the value of my article doesn't matter in this case, I know that I will be rewarded a little for my efforts.
I'm also testing different kinds of writing, communities that might be suitable for me to publish in, etc.... Integrating a platform takes time, especially since I'm French and my English is improving, but it's still academic, and I would say that voting manually also allows me to discover this whole new world that is Hive.
I'll take a look at a couple of your posts, and see if I have any suggestions if you like :) ? Welcome to Hive, by the way 🙌
Oh thank you to take time to look at my blog. Suggestions are welcomed !
I'm checking now :) One big thing is to always source your pictures :) If they're yours, you should definitely say so :) And if not, always include the link :)
Ok most of pictures are mine, some of them have bien taken in my Facebook account. For others I take in pixabay and mentionne it under the pic
It's definitely a great idea to say they're yours - I just read your interview with Her Highness, I'm impressed :)
Pictures from Facebook and such really aren't a good idea here. It's always preferable that everything is either original or from royalty free sites like Pixabay, Unsplash, Pexels, etc
Yes they are part of my life since more than 15 years I love to let them talking 😉 I take note for the advice for pics, thanks
Hey you're French?😱
Funny how i made a thread of not seeing French people around here and i just found one😱
It is surreal🙃
!LADY
View or trade
LOHtokens.@ibbtammy, you successfully shared 0.1000 LOH with @bnbsc and you earned 0.1000 LOH as tips. (1/1 calls)
Use !LADY command to share LOH! More details available in this post.
excellent synchronicity 🙃 Yes I'm french and leave in France 🇨🇵
Ohhh really nice 😃😃
If you are referring to the ocd votes you've received I can assure you those have been manually picked, maybe you mean the trail of votes that follow ours, then yeah those are auto and we can't really do anything about it but at least they're following manual votes in this case.
Voting manually is the best for newcomers and leaving comments like these, it's the best way for them to grow and audience and receive more consistent votes/engagement and over time also autovotes/trails, then it's up to you not to abuse them. ^^
Yes I was meaning the trail of votes. Thanks you for the advice ;)
I don’t necessarily agree with what I am about to say because I am just thinking out loud, but …
It could be (theoretically) hard coded that there is a curation reward reduction for voting for the same account within a certain time period. The reduction could be sent to the DHF.
This would encourage people to seek new authors, follow manual curation trails, or vote for the author anyway because they provide valuable content and give up their extra curation rewards.
Alternatively, this could be implemented on a resource credit level. Voting for the same author within a certain time frame takes extra resource credits. This would encourage people to do the actions above or power up more Hive.
Making these types of changes could be framed from a chain security perspective. This change isn’t to take away rewards from good authors, but rather to ensure that underrewarded authors and found so we have greater decentralization and more users.
Yeah but you always gotta think about the activities of those wanting to maximize and what they'd do. We tried at one point, can't remember what exactly the ruleset was, but if an account received the same vote too often it would grant diminishing returns (25% less value, followed by 50%, 75%, etc) and that mostly resulted in maximizers just create more accounts and voting on them there.
Times are different now of course so there may be some value behind this idea but it would require running some simulations of how it could potentially be abused and if it would cause any harm to authors.
I assume you mean the authors created more accounts for spam purposes (to hide their activities) and not the curators creating accounts. That has seemed to significantly go away and I would think the likelihood of that is the same if this change is made or not since self voting activities like that always have to operate in the dark.
But from just a straight “should I manual vote vs auto vote” perspective, I think it will overall come down to which gives a better return with minimal effort. Adding value to the manual vote with a layer two solution seems like a steep uphill battle. Reducing auto votes on the base layer seems like the only way and like you said, auto vote programs will just evolve, so detecting it has to be done another way. That is where my thinking was.
Current top authors will lose votes if people change their behavior, but if it is framed as properly rewarding under valued content and improving overall decentralization of the base token, I think the community can get behind that.
Personally, I admire whales who take time to manually curate posts and leave encouraging comments on posts. That way, it helps people to take correction where necessary, aiding growth.
But those who are involved in auto voting probably have a good reason for their actions too. Irrespective of how we see it, they're also contributing to the growth of Hive. I believe that before someone is placed on an auto vote, the person must have been watched over a period of time and is eventually verified as a dedicated writer with great contents. This way, great writers are rewarded and the rewards can go round fairly.
Good afternoon sir. Unfortunately, your post will not solve anything, I mean in a positive way. Auto-voting has been and will be, a lot is said and written about it. Those who received significant amounts for their publications by auto-voting will continue to do so. In a word, high-quality content is of no interest to anyone now, there is an interest in making quick money. My independent opinion is that today auto-voting will destroy any blockchain, it's a matter of time. Only manual curation and brave talented people will be able to take the Hive platform to a new and in-demand level. It seems to me that decentralization and auto-voting are generally incompatible things. Maybe I'm wrong, I'm not a professional. This is my point of view, which I express to you directly and without fear. People decide everything, almost everything, if they are real people! Thank you very much for your interesting post. I sincerely wish you all the very best 🙏
Well I don't think autovoting means quick money, it may take a long time for accounts to receive those autovotes, time they have to prove themselves, etc, unless they land there unfairly somehow. I don't think it will result in the blockchain being destroyed, lol, but I do think that eventually once we move away from most abuse happening through plagiarism/id theft and vote-trading we're probably going to start becoming a lot more careful with autovotes and the content and the author they land on to see if they truly do deserve them and we'll have a lot of downvote mana eventually to use against it, especially if prices soar high and post rewards start getting ridiculous.
You perfectly understand what I mean, but you professionally moved the arrows in the other direction. May God help you.
Maybe you're the one who doesn't understand what I mean or what you read in the post then, autovotes can't be stopped, you can't magically make them stop and they in and of themselves can't destroy the blockchain or make decentralization so weak that Hive becomes worthless. When used well they can work as some kind of subscription model, "hey I like what you're doing, here's part of my daily voting power towards you, keep it up". That's a strength of Hive, something that wouldn't be possible on most other chains. The issue is when it gets abused or when the total amount of autovotes exceeds into giving authors a piece of the pie that's too high from the reward pool, when that happens there's downvotes at our side to combat it.
Downvotes on excessively rewarded authors through autovotes mean that both the author and the autovoters get smaller returns, over time this means those not indulged in such activity get more curation rewards and every other post gets higher rewards based on the rewards that were removed through the downvotes of the overrewarded posts. This helps decentralization and distribution of stake. The issue is most don't use downvotes, a very few percentage use them badly and it's in general not a fun thing to do or receive because we're human and have emotions. Like my emotions towards your dumbass ending of your comment.
I didn't deserve this treatment. I have been polite to you.
"May god help you" is polite?
I don't really care what you think you deserve, I responded to your comment that I don't agree with your opinions and fears and you responded what I translated as an asshole back.
It's a subject I've been touching more on recently too, I use auto votes to ensure I use 'some' of my voting power daily, as some days I don't get around to manual curation. It's always great to stumble into a great post and be able to curate it, so keeping balance is key, especially for a sloth!
For my community we have a manual curation account who's sole job is to curate there, and keep things as fair as can be, hopefully, we can continue to onboard more users so the curations will become even more spread and balanced.
Interesting views you’re sharing here. I used to have few auto votes and curation trails - in fact those are still running, but as I intentionally maintain my mana bellow the trigger, I’m in fact rarely joining the votes :)
I’ll look closely and with impatience what you come up with... specially this new system to connect web2 platforms and social networks to this HIVE place !
I'm not sure if you can inhibit automatic voting bots. If possible, those who decide not to use their HP and leave it dormant will earn something like the 3% in effect now, compared to those who prefer to vote manually and get an APR of around 9-10% today.
@tipu curate
Upvoted 👌 (Mana: 11/41) Liquid rewards.
Yeah so instead we'd try to get them to delegate to trusted, longtime running projects that return most curation rewards and maybe even more if there's rewards being generated to go towards it.
It takes time to curate and give decent thought to a post.
Some posts are pretty rough, but it's not always easy to parse what is lazy farming and what is down to OP posting in a 2nd language.
Hmm dunno if I can agree much with that, if someone's lack of language/spelling is the issue it'll usually show in their history of posting, but there's plenty of authors who receive autovotes and go to extreme cases of making sure they continue receiving them which can easily be noticed that in the past, maybe before they were getting them, they were putting in a lot more effort. It's like @shiftrox mentioned in his comment, it's about authors who don't care if they take advantage of the autovotes they're getting and try to optimize/maximize them with close to no effort. The latter is often a lot easier to determine and it's usually not because someone is struggling with the language in my opinion.
This is where chatgpt is going to be a real headache 😢
Democracy at it's finest. Doesn't matter what is implemented there will just be another way around that system. Voting is hard in general and I often dip far too low and chew through my VP too much but some days there are good posts, other days there aren't.
Talking about it keeps it valid and lets people know they are being watched and less likely to extend rorting the system.
Time consuming with manual, very rewarding in the long run, actually getting to learn about people in distant lands (know, like, trust factor), debating differences, topics are varied, sometimes we get stuck in a rut. OCD presents new from various people which has been fruitful.
Sharing to Web2:
Twitter still works attracting some.
Facebook stopped pulling in photo which more often than not sells the topic on hand. Reddit became cumbersome from my side eventually shut my account down.
People will go the extra mile, depending on reward, some great folk introducing people to onboard, time consuming assisting which many communities do offer.
I'm 100% manual curation. The laziest I get is to sometimes drop my last 2-3 votes per day on large comments made on posts from users I follow. For me, those hidden incentives you mentioned are big. I want to reward real people making quality content but also people reading and taking the time to respond (meaningfully). That's how I see HIVE growing/succeeding. If everyone is just extracting rent, this place will die.
I think it's a great idea to try and reward manual curation for exactly this reason, and I hope your revenue idea pans out.
My low tech idea is based on my situation. You've delegated me some HP, which makes my manual curation worth more. Not enough to be meaningful on post rewards, but nicely sized for comments. Perhaps you could white list people in OCD or just the community in general and delegate it out. You could probably use HIVE stats to track their votes over time. No self-voting, spreading votes between different people, etc.
The reward of course is baked in: more HP means we'd get more hive ourselves. Call us something fun like "The Comment Curation Brigade" CCB 😄
Hi @acidyo. I read everything as carefully as possible since I don't have a good knowledge of English.
I feel like sharing many things, especially as regards the opportunity to favor manual voting, others a little less, such as the tendency to prevent those who start using Hive today from reaping the same advantages as those who started before . And this last thing is also a bit in contrast with the desire to bring more people into Hive.
Having said that, however, as a newcomer, I would like to focus attention on one aspect: the ease of use of the Hive ecosystem.
It is wonderful to see so many initiatives born here, but it is absolutely difficult to be able to know them, to know their use and potential. For example: I often hear about POSH, but I don't know what it is and how it works. I don't have much time to look for explanations (I don't have much time to write articles either) and it's not easy to do. Poor knowledge of English definitely doesn't help.
I think a big, very big priority on Hive would be some app, site, or any other structure or solution to this problem. Maybe it's just my fault and it already exists but I don't know it. In this case I apologize. Although I don't think there aren't others having this same problem.
Since I started here in hive I am voting manually. Sometimes I wish to autovote especially when I am busy but I haven't done it yet.
I think it is much more important for people to vote manually. It feels more valuable than these automatic votes. But I'm not sure if some of the people who are currently voting automatically are using Hive, which is normal. If I'm not going to use Hive for a while, I'd rather automate my votes. But at the moment only a very small percentage of my votes are automated, which is a trail to support Turkish users.
Congratulations @acidyo! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain And have been rewarded with New badge(s)
Your next target is to reach 83500 replies.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPCheck out our last posts:
Support the HiveBuzz project. Vote for our proposal!
I love that you are thinking farther ahead and planning for it. The idea of adrevenue sounds great. Like you said, traffic will eventually come and it's good to be prepared to take advantage of it. It might be slow initially, but may grow as more people come around. As you have already put this out here, I believe you will soon have a concrete plan on how to go about it :) Cheers!
When I started at Hive I always wondered how it was possible to vote for content in a matter of seconds? Then Jean explained to me what the automatic votes were and at that time I saw it as normal, maybe I didn't give it much importance, but as time went by I realized that it is good and bad at the same time.
Good for the curator and the user who receives them, but Hive makes no sense when it comes to publishing "quality" content because if we all get these automatic votes we would be happy, but very unfair and absurd at the same time. I'd rather be curated a thousand times manually, and have my post rated as quality, than post 500 words of crap, with bad writing and be rewarded the same.
We should always seek to improve our mistakes when writing quality content, and with automatic votes, we will never achieve it.
Automatic votes are a good tool for those of us who don't have a lot of time to do it manually, and although I'm not very involved, most of my votes are automatic through curation traces.
Well you have encouraged me to review my list of votes and paradoxically among my list, you are the one with the most followers.
but you have a good point here, we can get votes to posts that add value, by following the curation trail of an account that ensures it's handpicking the posts.
I confess that I had not seen it from your point of view, but they make sense.
I think i love manual voting, it exposes me to more users and communities, although i don't know how auto vote works but i can recognize it when i see one.
Quick question @acidyo what is APR?🙂
I am only voting manually - only because I don't know how to do automatic voting - LOL
!BEER
View or trade
BEER.Hey @acidyo, here is a little bit of
BEERfrom @rynow for you. Enjoy it!We love your support by voting @detlev.witness on HIVE .
https://leofinance.io/threads/@girlhunter/re-girlhunter-kuph8jyh
The rewards earned on this comment will go directly to the people ( girlhunter ) sharing the post on LeoThreads,LikeTu,dBuzz.
I confess to you that I vote and edit posts exclusively manually.
Of course there are days when time is really short and I can't read all the posts well and maybe leave a comment as I would like; in any case, I always retrieve them all and manually vote for the authors I prefer, perhaps after a few days, yes.
In reality, I see the vote as a reward for the quality of the posts, so before expressing it, I always like to read carefully the post that I'm going to reward; of course there are authors who I know will have high quality but this is one more reason to read their posts more thoroughly and create interactions and exchanges that I am sure will lead to my growth; maybe on these last authors I happen to cast my vote first and then read the post calmly as they are always long and articulated posts but this only happens because I want to read those posts well, among other things most of the time a single one is not enough for me reading since I want to get to the bottom of the thoughts of the authors.
Of course I'm not against automatic voting, I believe that like everything it should be used in a balanced and wise way, it being understood that, if you have the possibility, manual voting is always better.
As always, your thoughts are great!😉
I do a mixture of autovote and manual, with manual far exceeding the votes. I am pretty active on the blockchain, except for odd times when I am away for a few weeks. While there are many good reasons to autovote, especially if it is an author I have been reading for a long time and even though I voted for it, I will most likely go and read it in the next day. My schedule doesn't always allow me to upvote in a timely manner. I prefer to manually vote, which also pushes me to make it around to different people. I may like the comment a person makes on a post, so I will go see what they are all about and so on. It is addictive and helps me discover new people.
I run a small community called #MarketFriday, which is 100% manually curated. I like to see where my upvote is going and be able to stop abuse, should there be any, which is easier if I am visiting each post and voting manually.
I tell all the newbies with no real power to not worry about the upvote as much as the comment. The comment is what makes them shine. I will go for a great comment any day. I have met some pretty amazing people that way. Long ago and far away, I had no money and would !tip people instead of an upvote. I had no more voting power, but, I left a tip with each comment. It didn't make anyone rich, but, many remembered me. That was my manual curation for that time. ;)
I need to reread the part about your curation project and what it could mean for the blockchain/people. Thanks for the heads up on the update of thoughts.
Please use https://peakd.com to send tips - because of HF24 tipU can not reliably send tips :(
Sorry, I was giving an example.
This point I always bring in some discussions in different discord serves...the system how it is right now rewards known accounts but with lazy writing system, and ignores small accounts making an effort to be creative.
@calumam please read this post if you see it
I have to disagree with that. Surely each person active on Hive can find at least 10 posts they want to read? And once you've read it, leaving a message for the author certainly improves your chances of getting more eyes on your own content.
Maybe that doesn't matter right now for the bigger accounts but it should. When Hive has millions of members, some of them willing and able to invest a good deal, competition is going to pick up for both eyes on posts as well as votes. It won't be business as usual.
Unfortunately since Cal put progress of the VYB project temporarily on hold, I'm pretty sure nobody has been gathering stats. But one of the conditions for having our POB and VYB delegations was to manually curate.
I know I've been manually curating 100% ever since, but I haven't asked anyone else if they continued to do so. What sort of extra incentives do you think would work to encourage more manual curation on Hive?
This post has been manually curated by the VYB curation project, by the way :)
This post has exciting content.