I don’t want to talk bad about a good concept but I believe there is a issue that needs addressing. I am one of the first people who talked with @scipio about delegating my full 2.100 steem power. This might not seem a lot to some, but that was my complete balance on steem at the time. I took down my delegation from @tipu and send it without any question to @steem-ua. Why because the concept is great and the ideas behind it are brilliant.
First let me give you some numbers. To show you how bad a idea it is to delegate a lot.
As you can see in the image delegating a big chunk to steem-ua means a loss of 60% a day. When you selfvote. As I don’t do these things I am more then happy to take a loss. And no problem with it what so ever. But when you read the following I strongly disagree with the way the big delegators are treaded.
Now I have been seeing some strange things. Utopian has delegate the full 18.000 sp to steem-ua. For that there contributors are taking into the post curation system. All nice and great that more people can benefit from steem-ua. But here is the catch. Why is that all posts from utopian that get a vote that is at least double of all the others. Why is it that one person gets a vote of 0.2 and the utopian post gets a vote of 0.5. Or even worse I seen a total batch get a vote of 0.1 and then all utopian posts 0.3.
After talking to @scipio about it and getting a response I concluded that in essence utopian runs in between the normal rounds. So for delegating they get a vote for all the contributors that are approved. I asked @scipio for a average number of votes / day for utopian he stated it are around 20 on average. As they don’t run in with the normal batch I can only wonder how the values are decided. I do however need to state they get higher votes then the normal delegators (with some obvious exceptions).
So in essence you as a delegator share a round with 790 delegators and you get a specific slot from top contributor to down ride sucky. Votes vary according to it. But the votes from utopian don’t get calculated in the rounds. So they get high votes no matter what. I seen post from a utopian contributor go as high as 1.2 with 3 comments on it? How can you explain that when someone who is delegating for themselves is receiving 0.1?
The one explanation I got from @scipio is that they get voted in before utopian bot votes on them. Because that would jinx because utopian is a high UA account. When I asked him why he could not exclude utopian bot from the voting he told me it was hard. Yet it is easy to make a utopian post go in between the other batches? As some might know I am learning to program. So this looks very easy to me.
if(utopian = present) { throw utopian ua out of calculation }
I wonder why this has not been shared. Why this info is hidden for the public. I got a special treatment and was added to the big delegator sponsor reward system. But that info was shared with the steem-ua users. Why was this not shared from the start? And look back at the calculations I made at the start. The normal sponsor reward only starts at 5.000 delegated sp. Meaning I would have made a loss of 80% instead of 60%. Because the 1.4 is the vote I got from the sponsor reward. Can you imagen what loss you would make if you delegated even more.
The facts speak for themselves and I don’t agree with this. I don’t agree with the fact this is not common knowledge. And I don’t agree that the delegators are loosing upvote rewards for a system like utopian who have 2-3m in sp. I don’t see any other big delegator gaining upvotes because they delegated 50.000 sp or more?
I understand I will probably make some people angry with this. And I will be getting some flags. But I believe transparency can make a system like UA truly great. But I felt I was tricked into this without knowing all the facts. @scipio is truly a smart person and I am shure he will do what is right. But at this moment in time I don’t agree with the actions or how this system abuses its delegators.
This is “friends politics” like we call it in Belgium!
