In this conclusion to our three-part discussion we talk about some of the more contentious issues on Steemit: self-voting, upvote bots, users who flood the feed with low quality posts, the project’s apparent lack of leadership, and more. If you missed them, part 1 of my interview with Steemit witness @dragosroua can be found here, and part 2 is here.
OK, we ended the last part with a mention of bots, which leads me to one of the supposed problems on Steemit: upvote bots like @booster, @randowhale, @lovejuice, @nettybot and @discordia. There’s also @treeplanter but he’s a little different as users don’t make as much profit, but instead he plants trees in Cameroon as part of an awesome program to save Abongphen Highland Forest.
Now, I’m using most of these bots on all my posts at the moment. They’re there, and if I don’t make use of them, I’m at the disadvantage. Let’s say I’m a new user… I want my reputation to increase, I want my posts to have visibility and I want my rewards increased. I feel my content is pretty good, at least better than the users who plagiarise someone else’s writing, or post a single photo and a word or two and are happy to take in a few cents. Given that these guys can use the same bots to boost their rewards and raise their reputation, I’m going to use them too while they’re around. What are your thoughts on that?
Dragos: So first of all, the reputation goes up when somebody with higher reputation than you upvotes you, but there’s nothing in the code that you get more Steem Power the more your reputation goes up. Reputation’s a vanity metric.
It does nothing?
Dragos: Exactly – it does nothing, from a financial point of view. If you look at the whales, some of them have a reputation of 42 and they’ve never posted at all, and they have like 500,000 Steem. Reputation is not tied to anything, but so many newcomers are interested in that.
Now, I think upvote bots, as you call them – well, I wasn’t very aware of them because I’m not in the target anymore, but I see that as a little bit of an ecosystem going on. I think it’s a good thing because it gives people a way of consuming Steem and making Steem travel from one person to another. That’s important because they are creating processes, and the platform needs processes between people to discover and understand the real value of Steem.
If you keep your money, and this other guy keeps his money, and that other guy keeps his money, nothing will happen. The real price will not be discovered. Price is discovered only when there is interaction, and I think these upvote bots, which can be made for better or worse, can help with that.
There’s nothing wrong with that – it’s like a community boosting feature. They may probably create some form of social engagement as well, like the example you gave of the guy planting trees in Cameroon. I have nothing against them. It’s a cool way to get something going on.
So, as a counter to that, I can send to a whole load of bots and time it so that I am featured in ‘hot’ and I can promote myself more, and it shows what could be a shortcoming in Steemit in that the kind of content that rises into your attention sphere can be manipulated by paying money for it. I may have the shittest article but I have enough SBD to promote myself, while someone else’s great post which should have risen on merit remains below the fold. What do you think of that argument?
Dragos: I think you just described the Steemit business model! (laughs) The Steemit business model is paying for users’ attention – this is what everything is about! Steemit is a way of buying people’s attention with money, and I think it works. It works everywhere. You see a lot of shitty content in the form of advertising on TV. Why? Because people pay for that.
It doesn’t change much from the inherent structure of the human being, this Steemit, nor the way our attention is sold to advertisers. It just eliminates the middle man, OK? That’s what it does, but in a way that is revolutionary. So, I don’t see this as a shortcoming at all. I see this as a symptom that Steemit is going in the right direction. If you want to grow higher on the platform, you may have to pay for it.
OK, that’s really a great way to look at it. The next thing I wanted to ask about was onboarding. It’s slow to get new users in, and Steemit is trying to go up against platforms that have hundreds of millions if not billions of users. We’ve got a really slow influx of users, and many of them, when they arrive simply put up low-quality content clogging the feeds. You really need curation – someone to go out there and find new people. But then you reach a critical mass where you can’t spend time looking for new people or you won’t have time to read the content of the people you follow and really enjoy. Can anything be done about the amount of poor quality content?
Dragos: I understand what you’re saying and I’ve run into this myself. This is usually referred to as the tragedy of the commons. The paradox when you go mainstream and you’re not niched – you know, if you look at Steemit as a very ‘cool’ place where all the cool guys hang out? Well, if you also want exposure and want to gain an audience of hundreds of thousands of people, well you have to balance this.
In the beginning, even 8 or 9 months ago, Steemit was a place frequented only by guys who had a common interest in anarchy, blockchain, that kind of stuff. Very few people even knew about Steemit at that point. The quality of the content was a little bit higher – at least, it wasn’t shitty. The reason for people being there was to share information and actually build something.
Right now, we have an influx of people from places that are less developed, and they’re seeing Steemit as a quick way to make a buck. For them, $1 is something like food for a week, so it’s important for them to do something that can generate that revenue as quickly as they can.
So, I don’t excuse them, but this is something we need to be aware of. If Steemit is “blog and get paid” then a lot of them are going to write shitty blog posts hoping to get paid for that.
But there are two questions in what you asked. The other is “what are we going to do with those guys?”… and I say, I don’t know. This is how it is. My approach is to ignore them. If you ignore them, they will naturally get selected, or filtered. Another thing I do is I post more or less regularly a few rules of how not to be a Steemit douche and I keep that in my footer. Also, I am encouraging people who post meaningful comments.
This is how you create a bit of glue between your followers. In the beginning everyone will say, “hi, upvote my post because I upvoted yours! Follow me!”. I totally ignore them, and I don’t flag them, because after a while the energy gets consumed and they think, “OK, I don’t get anything for that, forget it”. They will stop.
The other part of the question is: how do you create an audience? At this time, Steemit as a platform is quite opaque. In a way, it is like the initial App Store. Their metacontent was like a black box and you couldn’t do much about that. This is how Steemit is right now and it poses an interesting challenge, because you really have to do your homework.
Say you’ve found this platform and you believe it will multiply your blogging skills and suddenly turn them into money, and it will serve you an audience on a silver platter… well, I don’t believe this is going to happen. You have to work hard for your audience. I have had a blog for nine years. I started in 2008 after I sold my company, writing in English and I worked for two years… for two years… posting every day – every fucking day! – until I got on the first page of Reddit and got really viral and had like 20,000 visitors in one day. But remember, I had to work for two years. And now, you are here for three months and say to yourself, “OK, nothing’s happening. I have no readers!”. Well, you have to work hard! (laughs)
Because Steemit is so opaque, you have to do it old-school: follow people, spend time identifying them and posting meaningful comments – get their attention. It’s slow but because of the fact we have money involved here, the bond seems to be stronger. Once you form a bond with a follower, because you know that there’s someone else exchanging money in the transaction, that bond will last for much longer.
In other places it may be like, “I heard of a blogger, he sounded really cool, but I don’t remember his name” – no. Here, the bond formed is really strong. But I do believe that it will take longer to build an audience right now, but the audience you build here will be more valuable.
Cool. Awesome insights! So, I’ve only really heard about this and I’ve only experienced it once as I’ve only had one of my posts go huge when @hendrikdegrote gave me a $500 upvote and I got on @curie. Unfortunately Steem tanked that exact same week and by the end of it, it was worth around $290 – but that doesn’t matter, as it was my first exposure to whales. I initially thought, “wow, hundreds of people must have read it and voted!” but when I looked closer, it was actually just one major votes and not all that many page views by this time. I got talking to some people on Discord who started telling me how you get these whale circle-jerks where they all upvote each other and the money just goes to the top people. So, some people say, “there should be a maximum post value cap!” and others say, “there should be more even reward distribution” while others just say, “fuck it, life’s not fair, so why should Steemit be any different?”. What’s your attitude towards this?
Dragos: I think this is not a problem with whales.
It’s a problem of people?
Dragos: It’s a problem of people, because if you take away the amount of money the whales have, and you look at the voting habits of whales and minnows, you’ll see that minnows tend to vote each other and create circle-jerks the same way the whales are doing! (laughs) OK? Just take the money out of the picture and you will see that people are voting the same. It’s just that the whales have more money than the minnows.
If you really want to become a whale, you can just buy Steem. Put $100,000 on the table and you can have about 100,000 Steem*, and then you can vote for whoever you want! Your vote will probably be worth about $100.
(*Note: this interview was conducted before this week’s Steem price hike.)
The idea is that if you really want to make an impact, it’s the same as with every other area: buy something. I can see where it goes a little bit off if you’re imagining that Steemit is an equal place for everybody. Yes, it’s an equal place – but it’s not fair.
There is no such thing as fairness in life. You have an idea of fairness, I have an idea of fairness, that whale has an idea of fairness… I’m sure that for that whale, it was very fair to vote for their people, and they have no problem with that. I think fairness is a problem that is very subjective. If we try to enforce this with rules, we go into places I personally don’t want to go… I grew up in a socialist country until I was 19 and I don’t want to get there on Steemit, period.
I know how it is, and I know when people who have no idea how it is say, “OK, we should go there with Steemit”, well I just want to tell these people, “fuck off, you don’t know how it is!”. There’s no such thing as equal pay for everybody because we are different. We have different skills and expectations, different energy and abilities, so everybody should be paid according to what they do, not according to some rules.
@hendrikdegrote – making minnows’ dreams come true since September 2016.
My personal recommendation would be to not get into those kinds of discussions, about whales circle-jerking and so on, and instead start to build slowly your circle of dolphins. That will be much more useful! There’s a thing that all the people who focus their attention on the circle-jerks aren’t seeing, and that is that while you are whining, there are people out there making money! And not only through better blog posts or writing skills – those are secondary in this place. Community building skills are more important! You first build your audience, start to create relationships with people, and then start blogging and measure this over the course of at least six months. Instead of just whining, just post something good, hone your writing skills – stop whining about it being unfair. Who cares? Everything is unfair! (laughs)
Well, I kind of think the same thing. It stings sometimes to see the rewards for some of the posts out there, but at the same time: it’s just not fair. Life’s not fair… somewhere near here is a guy living in a cardboard box. You think he cares that some whale has not upvoted me?
Dragos: Yeah! That’s such a first-world problem! “Oh my, this whale didn’t vote for me, I am so poor!” (laughs) Look at it that way – from the perspective of the guy in the cardboard box.
So, I also wanted to ask about self-voting. Some people have a big problem with this – sometimes on posts, sometimes on comments, sometimes altogether – what do you think? I think self-voting your posts, if you feel you deserve it, is a fine use of one of your 10 votes per day. Likewise, you can strategically vote on a comment to get it up above all the spam and that much more noticed. What is your take on this?
Dragos: I don’t think this is something bad per-se. Once you get to a certain level of Steem Power, and I am talking about the way that the entire Steemit enterprise works, your level of Steem Power entitles you to a certain amount of the reward pool. It’s like shares in the company. In the whitepaper, this term “shares in the company” is used quite frequently. If you want to make use of the Steem Power and draw some shares from the ongoing printing of value, I think that’s your right.
Now, if you do this all the time and you upvote all your comments, I think you are doing it a little too much. I don’t think it’s bad from a financial point of view because I don’t think it will hurt the platform too much, but it’s bad for you as an individual because you will focus too much on giving value to yourself first. That never works in the long run.
If you go an upvote yourself for a year, you may probably get to a place where your ROI would be 3 or 4% per year, and this is better than keeping the money in the bank. So if you have this point of view, you can say to yourself, “I’m going to post on this platform, I am going to upvote the shit out of myself and my comments, and at the end of the year I will have 3 or 4% more money than I initially invested”.
What you are losing by going with this approach is the chance of a serendipitous encounter with other people. You may benefit from the fact that outside of the plastic bag in which you’re voting for yourself, you may find more influential people or more helpful people, and that’s where the real value is.
Say you put in some money and upvote yourself and end up with, say, $3,000 more at the end of the year – well, if you got just six votes from @hendrikdegrote or similar over the course of a year, well, that’s amazing, because you made the same amount of money from other people, while you are helping other people.
And six votes. That means you have two months to generate each vote. In two months I guarantee you that if you do your job right here, with community building, writing, curating, stuff like that, you generate more than that.
So, like I said, I don’t see something bad per se. I am upvoting my own posts, but I am not upvoting my comments. I am upvoting all the posts I publish, which is 2 or 3 per day, and other than that no. And I also have this contest where I give full upvotes to other people.
Through the steem.supply Easter eggs?
Dragos: Yeah, through the Easter eggs, stuff like that. I try to build a community and I try to build positive expectations around my activity, because when you build that, it will come back.
On top of the fact that it’s really useful for checking up on your upcoming payment, @dragosroua also rewards users who discover the Easter eggs he hides in the page. View full size.
OK great. Well, now total open ended: if you could suggest something that should change about Steemit, what would those be?
Dragos: There is a very subtle situation that is going on here that probably hurts Steem more than any technical stuff, and that is: who the fuck is leading Steemit? Who is running this?
There is some Steemit, Inc which is focusing on its development, and there are a few witnesses who are basically following the technical side of things, which is good in the beginning as you have technical guys who don’t let the network collapse and so forth. But, I see that from this collection of witnesses, something social should emerge. Some direction should emerge, and we should start voting on more sensitive issues than, say, what integer size should be used.
I think this lack of leadership which is perceived, and thus probably real, makes people confused – especially newcomers. Let’s say I come to Steemit and I wonder, “where is the Mark Zuckerberg of Steemit?!” – there really isn’t. There is Ned Scott who is following the development, and I know from sources very close to Ned and from my discussions with him and from his commenting on my posts, that his vision is that he builds something and then expects other people to build on top of it. To create ecosystems around it! Not to be like a huge, monolithic behemoth like Facebook or anything like that.
This way of transmitting that message is not very popular, and Steemit has a huge communication problem. The more subtle the leadership, the more visible the communication issue, and I certainly think they should do something about that. They had a few trials and errors, like hiring some marketing guys and stuff like that. But they’re quite young, and I understand. Ned is 28, Dan was in his early 30s, and it’s east to get stuck with people the same age. They want to hire guys in their 20s who know about marketing… but at the end of the month or the quarter or whatever, you realise the guy knows nothing, and he’s just followed hype and so on.
Now, maybe he is well-intended, but now you need to set your sights on people who are mid-level or more senior, and really know what they are doing. You need them in your close circle of people who are leading your development.
Well, wow, what can I say Dragos – thanks a lot. This interview has really run over time and I’ll probably be able to break it into three parts, but thanks so much for your time.
Dragos: Thanks so much for having me – it was a nice experience!
Yes, very cool – I’ve really enjoyed talking to you. Cheers!
Dragos: Thank you. Bye!
A massive thank you to @dragosroua for sharing all of this with us. You can vote for him as witness and visit his website at http://dragosroua.com/. Curious about when your next Steemit payments are due? Check out his app at http://steem.supply/
Previous:
Interesting People #22: Dragos Roua on the value of Steem, and what makes it different
Next:
Interesting People #24: Brian Fargo and Scott Bennie on Star Trek: The 25th Anniversary
Really good interview, thanks. You saved all the best material until the last one.
I really like his attitude. As a newbie I see some of these problems and it doesn't seem right, but he puts things into a really positive perspective.
Thanks very much. Yes, this was my favourite part of the discussion and covered a lot of cool topics.
I really hope this can generate some wider discussion on here on Steemit as he raises some very important points.
Anyway, appreciate the feedback and the upvote!
This is amazing interview. Many thanks @badastroza for making it and to @dragosroua for being very helpful in his comments.
I was lucky to have @hendrikdegrote vote for one of my posts when I was a new steemer, like in my first week of steemit. That post got the most number of upvotes and the highest rewards so far (of course!!). It was awesome to get good rewards of course, but since I had no idea how things worked then, who is who, whales, dolphins or minnows.
I just though that I did a good job writing my post and was upvoted for it (LOL).
What came later was like a falling from a hanging cliff or something. I had barely anyone looking at my posts and I made barely 0.01 (mainly was my self vote). I got so depressed and confused for a while. Why nothing works anymore. I am the same person that wrote all these posts, why that freaking post worked and nothing else.
Only today I found that @hendrikdegrote was the one responsible of voting me so generously then. Interestingly, now that I am reading your post, I was like (Darn it man! He is awesome. I wish he appears to vote me again. LOL).
Funny how things work here on Steemit. We need more posts like this they present educational information about how steemit works, the tricks, the problems, the okays and the no nos, from knowledgeable people to new people.
As new comers, with all the marketing hype we heard before joining steemit, it is easy to think that making money here is easy breezy, especially seeing the huge numbers that some new people are making and continue making. Not a very good thing for the morale to find that we are not good enough to reach there as fast. Knowledge is power.
Thanks again for sharing :)
Thanks again for this conversation and for the effort of putting it into a readable form. I really enjoyed it :)
Same here, man. Thank you :)
Interesting stuff. People will argue about Steemit being 'unfair', but it depends on how people want to act. Some will just grab all they can whereas other will want to help build the community, even if they make less in the process. I've tried to be true to my own principles. Early on I'd get into anything that would pay me a little Steem, but now I'm trying to help others as I've done okay. As everything is in the blockchain it is possible to see everything a user did and they can be judged on that. Reputation is more than just a number :)
Sounds like you're going about it and have the right approach. Agree that one's Steemit reputation extends far beyond just their reputation score :)
Appreciate the upvote and the comment - thanks a lot.
This was a great series thank you!
@dragosroua is a very smart chap and his contribution to Steemit is epic - blogger - developer - witness - he has it all!
Thanks again, great stuff.
Asher
You're welcome - thanks for the encouraging words! Enjoyed putting it together, even though it's probably the longest interview I have ever transcribed. Might need to move to video if him and I do something like this again ;)
Did you voice to text or type the lot? An epic job either way!
Nah this was recorded on Skype then typed out by hand - not sure how well Dragon Naturally Speaking (which I do own) would pick up and interpret Dragos' Romanian accent.
Thanks :)
A commendable effort and a big thank you for putting the work in to share this with us.
Congratulations. This post features in my latest Curation Article. @MrSquiggle - supporting the #TeamAustralia community and promoting creative content. Join us in Discord.
Upvoting this comment will help support @mrsquiggle to continue to support the #TeamAustralia community.
Awesome - thank you :)
Thanks for your courage, the fact of aborting problematic subjects on the platform steemit. You will have to abort the subject of the centenu of bad quality but nothing about the content of good quality made by minnow and which does not receive any interest from the community. thanks @badastroza
Wow wow this was really a powerful interview.
The idea of using bots is not really a good one to our community.
It makes people think that Steemit has shortcuts that can make them earn money faster and also grow their reputation score quickly.
People should know you can grow naturally here even without the use of bots.
If it was possible we would reduce or completely remove bots(my view)!
The issue of new users getting on board with the promise of earning a quick buck and end up posting low quality content .
We cannot do really much to stop them,as you said we need to ignore them and with time they will even drop out!
This community will work for people who are ready to learn and act.
It is like life itself,it is those who work hard and who have a clear vision who make it .
This quote below summarizes everything.
Steemit is like life,you get what you put in.
Thanks for the interview series and devoting time to make Steemit better.
Hey - thanks for the awesome, detailed comment! I think that bots have their place for minnows, definitely. I think you cross a certain threshold in terms of expected return on every post whereby they're just no longer needed, unless you intend to promote something into 'hot' or 'trending'. In fact, demand has gone so crazily through the roof at the moment that I think only @randowhale (when he is awake) and @minnowbooster (limited to 5SBD of transfers per week) remain guaranteed profitable.
Agreed that we should just ignore the low-effort, low-quality posting users - problem is, for every user giving up on this approach, another one will have joined the platform. I think they're unfortunately here to stay for as long as the 'promise' of easy money remains. :)
Steemit is definitely like life: you get out of it what you put in, some people have unfair advantages, other people have it harder than they deserve, and the sooner you do away with illusions that you deserve anything or that it should be "fair", the better.
Appreciate the lengthy comment and feedback on this. It was a real pleasure putting this series together!
This is one of the best interviews that you have conducted @badstroza that I can say.
It was really wonderful to read this amazing interview. Got to know a lot of things about steemit and blogging from @dragosroua. It also cleared many of my confusions regarding steemit.
I also believe that to succeed, not only on steemit, but anywhere, hardwork and determination is important. This I have learnt from my 4 years of blogging experience. :)
Enjoyed it a lot, keep bringing awesome content like this @badastroza. Thanks. :)
Awesome feedback @nitesh9! And your hard work and determination have clearly paid off, from what I have seen on you on Steemit.
Thanks for the great comment - always appreciated!
Good post.i resteem this post
Awesome, thanks for the resteem :)
This post recieved a vote from @minnowpond. For more information click https://steemit.com/steemit/@minnowpond/boost-your-rewards-with-minnowpond
I don't know if this is entirely accurate though. From the FAQ:
Also.
Hey! Thanks for the comment. @dragosroua qualified those comments with "from a financial point of view", as in there's no direct correlation between reputation score as a number and the dollar value of post rewards.
You're absolutely right, but I think he's being very specific about his statements "from a financial point of view". :)
I think this part of the interview is the best part from all. It just tells the obvious which most of us are blind to see. From the way life, steemit and life on steemit is, to the main problems of steemit.
Thanks for this.
Thank you very much! Totally agree with you :)
Wow, great post.
You give good interview :)
@dragosroua is a very Interesting Person. You did good.
I have really enjoyed reading this interview, all three parts. You asked some good questions, and Dragos answered them very well. I like his philosophy. Great job mate!
Awesome - thanks a lot for the feedback and the resteem! Consider voting for him as a witness if you have some votes to spare, as it can only do the platform good. :)
Already have mate! Was my first Witness vote :)
Haha, great - I am sure he will be stoked to read that!
Thanks again, appreciated :)
the marketing guru ...wasn't?
I'm so shocked!
not really...I thought he was lame.
I like this interview so much!! I agree with @dragosroua in most of things in this part... actually he said what I think better than I could say it here:
and here:
This isn't for steemit only either... people just notice it on steemit more because there's money involved.
The people I met through 6 years in Facebook are commenting on everything I post right now, that's the type of community building you need!!
Hope more people understand this.
great interview with Dragos, it's been on my mind the future of Steem, reading the interview i realized that most social media websites are where friends interact with existing friends or family, but Steem right now is about meeting new people (who basically share an alternative perspective on the world). It is true, it is best just to ignore spammers. It's also true about building slowly, but people are a little keener to make relationships b/c of the financial incentive, that's just human nature. I agree their does seem to be a leadership void on steemit, but also that some communities are growing organically, and it is probably the future that steemit does stay somewhat niche, although it could be somewhat strong niches if cryptos fulfill their destiny. the presence of artists and creatives here does bode well. ty
You've done an amazing job here @badastroza. This series has been very eye opening.
This post has received a 33.33 % upvote from @steemorocco thanks to: @badastroza.
This post received a 1.5% upvote from @randowhale thanks to @badastroza! For more information, click here!
@originalworks
@OriginalWorks Mention Bot activated by @badastroza. The @OriginalWorks bot has determined this post by @badastroza to be original material and upvoted it!
To call @OriginalWorks, simply reply to any post with @originalworks or !originalworks in your message!
For more information, Click Here!
Resteemed and 100% upvoted. Thank you for using my service!
Read here how the new bot from Berlin works.
@resteem.bot
This post recieved a vote from @minnowpond. For more information click https://steemit.com/steemit/@minnowpond/boost-your-rewards-with-minnowpond
Congratulations! This post has been upvoted from the communal account, @minnowsupport, by ${username} from the Minnow Support Project. It's a witness project run by aggroed, ausbitbank, teamsteem, theprophet0, someguy123, neoxian, followbtcnews/crimsonclad, and netuoso. The goal is to help Steemit grow by supporting Minnows and creating a social network. Please find us in the Peace, Abundance, and Liberty Network (PALnet) Discord Channel. It's a completely public and open space to all members of the Steemit community who voluntarily choose to be there.
This post has received a 35.71 % upvote from @buildawhale thanks to: @badastroza. Send 0.100 or more SBD to @buildawhale with a post link in the memo field to bid on the next vote.
To support our curation initiative, please vote on my owner, @themarkymark, as a Steem Witness
This post has received a 10.59 % upvote from @lovejuice thanks to: @abh12345. They have officially sprayed their dank amps all over your post rewards. GOOD TIMES! Vote for Aggroed!
Congratulations @badastroza! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPThis post was resteemed by @resteembot!
Good Luck!
Learn more about the @resteembot project in the introduction post.
Check out the other content resteemed by @resteembot.
Some of it is really cool!
This post has received a Bellyrub and 2.78 % upvote from @bellyrub thanks to: @badastroza. Send SBD to @bellyrub with a post link in the memo field to bid on the next vote, every 2.4 hours. Be sure to vote for my Pops, @zeartul, as Steem Witness Hope you enjoyed your bellyrub!
This post has received a 9.59 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @badastroza.
This post has received a 29.33 % upvote from @nettybot thanks to: @badastroza.
Send 0.100 SBD to @nettybot with a post link in the memo field to bid on the next vote.
Oh, and be sure to vote for my owner, @netuoso, as Steem Witness
Have a great day!
This post has received a 8.59 % upvote from @upgoater thanks to: @badastroza. Please vote @swelker101 for witness
@badastroza got you a $4.71 @minnowbooster upgoat, nice! (Image: pixabay.com)
Want a boost? Click here to read more!
Hi @badastroza,
I really enjoyed this interview, and now I'm looking into your feed and finding you have a lot of interesting interviews. Will need to spend some time here in your timeline hehe.
Thank you, good job!
Awesome - thanks :)