RE: HF21 and the Steem Vision

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: HF21 and the Steem Vision

bil.prag in #hf21 • 6 years ago

Anyway, the point is, piling all of one's rshares into few posts is better than massive post farming now.

here's a downside to this though: it's harder to make money at all at the low end of rshares.

So in essence, please don't bring new people to the platform, because only thing they will be able to do is leave. big acc, that we want to change their behavior, will not vote for them because, well why vote them when they know it could be that only few minnows will also vote for them. minnows should find 10 acc that have a decent content with a bit of organic votes, and some whales votes and just autovote for them. minnows voting for small acc will just be impossible, with a lot of 0 if they do.

As mentioned before, the intent of convergent linear is to make it unprofitable to create thousands of posts with small votes in an attempt to hide from everyone.

in short term, punishing thousents because of hundred.

Even after reading all bunch about this, and reading your posts that are really well written, i could be wrong, and i would really want to know why am i wrong. because i only got 1 answer on this, and it was everyone will benefit with more curation, how do you not see that, you are just blind.

6 years ago in #hf21 by bil.prag

0.00 BPC

2 votes

Sort:

Trending

[-]

eonwarped 6 years ago

So because of how curation works, auto voting 10 popular posts is not a good strategy in general. If you are not first, the share of curation you are getting is not going to be that great. And you can auto vote earlier and earlier to sacrifice curation to find a sweet spot. But if everyone is doing it, you may really find that you're not left with much. You'll get something, but actually you get more if you discover a new post, and share it with others and get them to vote too.

The problem with thinking about 50/50 and lower end cuts is that even though on paper it just sounds like a pay cut for the little posts, it may not work that way once people actually start seeking out content due to the increased incentives (the curation curve is key here, because "just auto vote" is really not that great of a strategy), as well as penalties for keeping lazy behavior (which is what I've focused my posts about).

I'm not sure if I've fully addressed your concerns, because it's not going to be perfect by any means. But essentially, penalizing "lazy behavior" forces alternative considerations, and that will have cascading effects. Is it enough? Will it work? I can't guarantee it.

because i only got 1 answer on this, and it was everyone will benefit with more curation, how do you not see that, you are just blind.

It's not obvious at all, and even worse is that it's not guaranteed, so you do have a point to be concerned.

Posted using Partiko Android

0.00 BPC

2 votes

[-]

bil.prag 6 years ago

so the premise is that people who now just upvote themselves will now look for new undiscovered content and also share it with other people to convince them to vote. not really seeing this, but hope i am wrong.

i suck at this nevertheless and vote for things that i like when ever so i will probably just get less, but who cares... need to stop reading about this.

Thanks for the effort.

0.00 BPC

2 votes

[-]

valued-customer 6 years ago (edited)

You do not suck at this, except if 'this' is ignoring common sense and believe BS.

Common sense reveals that almost all the rewards pool now goes to profiteers, and not content creators, and this easily explains why Steem has such a dismal retention rate. Since extracting the rewards from the business of Steem, which is creating content that attracts a market for Steem, that in turn creates capital gains, instead extracts the value that would create capital gains, all the proposals in the EIP will make that profiteering more profitable more rapidly, by creating a modified rewards curve that increases the rewards for bigger votes, and doubling curation rewards, which only matter to whales.

Common sense, which you have, tells you exactly what is going to happen under EIP. Only folks bemused by code instead of actual business, or rabidly intent on profiteering, can miss this common sense.

Trust your gut.

0.00 BPC

2 votes

[-]

bil.prag 6 years ago (edited)

i feel that this change heavily depends on downvotes and if everyone will downvote the "bad behavior" it could maybe work. but then when you think about the downvote you will think about "judge not if you are not ready for judgment" "before you point your fingers, make sure your hands are clean" and the throw the first stone thing.

0.00 BPC

2 votes

[-]

arthur.grafo 6 years ago

And what is bad behaviour?

If my political views are not favoured by you, I must be flagged? For instance I saw someone get trashed (by a bot) because he mentioned an article by Alex Jones.

I'm just wondering who is going to trash the very big accounts because their posts are crappy? Just because someone got in early and built up their SP, it does not mean they are worthy steemians. If they are exempted, then how can steemit improve? (ahhh, but they are making the big delegations to the flag bots, so not likely they will be trashed, is it?)

0.00 BPC

[-]

bil.prag 6 years ago

nah i don't care about your different view on anything :D one downvote on something that you don't like is ok, why not, but a scripted organised attack is just stupid.

i heard somewhere that some bigger acc plan to downvote some bigger acc that are selfvoting shitposts and similar. we shall see

0.00 BPC

[-]

valued-customer 6 years ago

The reason for most people not flagging is they don't want to be flagged back. It's not that they lack VP to flag. It's that they lack the SP to withstand being retaliated against. Free flags won't change that. It'll make Bernie fly more flags though.

0.00 BPC

3 votes