TOP 200 effective Steemit сurators that encourage discussion for the 2017.09.08
I want to share with you statistics about the most effective Steemit curators.
This statistic is not about how much the authors or curators have earned. This statistics shows the list of curators, whose contribution to the reward pool distribution is the most significant.
What does this mean?
You can say that there is nothing interesting in this statistics. That it is clear that the reward pool is distributed by whales. But!
The most interesting thing is how the curator distributes the reward pool. He can vote only for his posts and his comments. He can vote for a selected circle of authors and affiliated accounts. But also he can vote for a large number of authors who publish interesting content.
Thus, an effective curator is a curator who has sufficient Steem Power (he can be an investor or a popular author who has earned his Steem Power by publishing interesting content), devoting time and effort to the content curating at Steemit and distributing a reward pool in favor of the authors. And the efficiency level is estimated by how much SBD curator distributes among as many authors as possible.
But this time we will review those curators who reward the discussions, that is, they vote for the comments of other users.
According to the ideology of the Steemit creators, the discussion is as valuable an element as the author's content. Confirmation of this is the allocation of a separate pool of awards for comments.
How it works?
Votes - Each curator distributes a certain part of the reward pool with his votes (upvote / flag).
Authors - This part of the pool he distributes between a certain number of authors.
VAS (vote average strength) - For general awareness, we can estimate the average vote strength in percents (%), with which the curator votes.
Contr. (SBD) (Contribution in SBD) - The distributed part of the pool is the contribution of the curator, it is calculated in SBD. In this case, the author's reward is taken into account. The curator's reward is not taken into account.
Share % - The percentage of the of the curator contribution among the contributions of all curators, we can also estimate for information purposes in %.
Eff. - The effectiveness of the curator is estimated in conventional units and is calculated as follows.
The total number of authors who published rewarded comments for the period under study is determined.
Then the contribution of the curator is divided by the total number of authors, and then multiplied by the number of authors for whom the curator voted for the period.
Thus, we see that, having distributed even a smaller number of SBD between a larger number of authors, the curator can be more effective than other curators. At the same time, having a greater voice power, but not actively voting, supporting a small number of authors, the curator takes a lower position in the rating.
And now, statistics.
4816 authors published their rewarded comments during this day.
5005 accounts participated in the comments curating according to information from the database.
43649 votes were made during this day.
4363,99 SBD - is the total author rewards for this day.
TOP-200 effective comments curators for September 8, 2017
№ | Account | Votes | Authors | VAS(%) | Contr. (SBD) | Share % | Eff. |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | @surpassinggoogle | 207 | 137 | 1 | 184,08 | 4,22 | 5,24 |
2 | @good-karma | 178 | 178 | 0 | 66,85 | 1,53 | 2,47 |
3 | @gentlebot | 74 | 71 | 100 | 75,8 | 1,74 | 1,12 |
4 | @jesta | 1488 | 85 | 0 | 42,49 | 0,97 | 0,75 |
5 | @thing-2 | 73 | 69 | 100 | 44,19 | 1,01 | 0,63 |
6 | @broncnutz | 80 | 63 | 6 | 40,71 | 0,93 | 0,53 |
7 | @kaylinart | 38 | 34 | 24 | 53,23 | 1,22 | 0,38 |
8 | @randowhale | 131 | 15 | 2 | 110,37 | 2,53 | 0,34 |
9 | @randowhale1 | 99 | 15 | 2 | 90,4 | 2,07 | 0,28 |
10 | @donkeypong | 32 | 31 | 3 | 41,7 | 0,96 | 0,27 |
11 | @alexbeyman | 37 | 33 | 100 | 37,83 | 0,87 | 0,26 |
12 | @simonjones | 9 | 2 | 100 | 544,82 | 12,48 | 0,23 |
13 | @pharesim | 57 | 45 | 0 | 23,03 | 0,53 | 0,22 |
14 | @mexbit | 29 | 15 | 67 | 44,25 | 1,01 | 0,14 |
15 | @adm | 247 | 2 | 2 | 298,51 | 6,84 | 0,12 |
16 | @esteemapp | 174 | 174 | 1 | 3,43 | 0,08 | 0,12 |
17 | @noisy | 12 | 9 | 85 | 59,4 | 1,36 | 0,11 |
18 | @bitcoiner | 176 | 176 | 1 | 2,76 | 0,06 | 0,1 |
19 | @awgbibb | 40 | 37 | 10 | 13,28 | 0,3 | 0,1 |
20 | @kevinwong | 37 | 35 | 3 | 13,9 | 0,32 | 0,1 |
21 | @gamer00 | 62 | 31 | 10 | 13,94 | 0,32 | 0,09 |
22 | @timcliff | 41 | 35 | 7 | 12,95 | 0,3 | 0,09 |
23 | @craig-grant | 4 | 4 | 100 | 93,08 | 2,13 | 0,08 |
24 | @swisswatcher | 178 | 178 | 1 | 1,83 | 0,04 | 0,07 |
25 | @midnas-howler | 24 | 23 | 5 | 13,9 | 0,32 | 0,07 |
26 | @streetstyle | 29 | 25 | 10 | 12,64 | 0,29 | 0,07 |
27 | @canadian-coconut | 19 | 16 | 2 | 20,22 | 0,46 | 0,07 |
28 | @feruz | 177 | 176 | 1 | 1,77 | 0,04 | 0,06 |
29 | @deanliu | 18 | 18 | 32 | 16,09 | 0,37 | 0,06 |
30 | @nippel66 | 40 | 22 | 52 | 13,26 | 0,3 | 0,06 |
31 | @tommyhansen | 18 | 13 | 36 | 23,74 | 0,54 | 0,06 |
32 | @stackin | 55 | 50 | 2 | 5,01 | 0,11 | 0,05 |
33 | @ackza | 48 | 40 | 20 | 6,56 | 0,15 | 0,05 |
34 | @cryptoeagle | 48 | 29 | 52 | 7,71 | 0,18 | 0,05 |
35 | @ramta | 14 | 13 | 5 | 20,16 | 0,46 | 0,05 |
36 | @mattclarke | 30 | 21 | 37 | 11,8 | 0,27 | 0,05 |
37 | @lichtblick | 84 | 57 | 1 | 4,15 | 0,1 | 0,05 |
38 | @matt-a | 25 | 16 | 4 | 15,12 | 0,35 | 0,05 |
39 | @vandeberg | 5 | 5 | 50 | 35,52 | 0,81 | 0,04 |
40 | @chance777 | 59 | 20 | 34 | 9,18 | 0,21 | 0,04 |
41 | @exyle | 20 | 17 | 4 | 10,08 | 0,23 | 0,04 |
42 | @happymoneyman | 40 | 30 | 7 | 6,93 | 0,16 | 0,04 |
43 | @hilarski | 35 | 32 | 12 | 6,73 | 0,15 | 0,04 |
44 | @elyaque | 41 | 40 | 3 | 4,51 | 0,1 | 0,04 |
45 | @eric-boucher | 48 | 22 | 14 | 8,13 | 0,19 | 0,04 |
46 | @surfyogi | 15 | 15 | 8 | 13,24 | 0,3 | 0,04 |
47 | @teamsteem | 14 | 13 | 2 | 14,88 | 0,34 | 0,04 |
48 | @blocktrades | 3 | 3 | 5 | 71,37 | 1,64 | 0,04 |
49 | @moala | 14 | 2 | 100 | 88,59 | 2,03 | 0,04 |
50 | @mammasitta | 38 | 36 | 8 | 5,45 | 0,12 | 0,04 |
51 | @anu | 26 | 26 | 6 | 5,44 | 0,12 | 0,03 |
52 | @michaelstobiersk | 54 | 41 | 47 | 3,58 | 0,08 | 0,03 |
53 | @asmolokalo | 18 | 12 | 100 | 13,06 | 0,3 | 0,03 |
54 | @tipu | 32 | 12 | 26 | 10,45 | 0,24 | 0,03 |
55 | @thecryptofiend | 39 | 36 | 2 | 3,92 | 0,09 | 0,03 |
56 | @xiknybuc | 8 | 4 | 100 | 32,94 | 0,75 | 0,03 |
57 | @floridasnail | 39 | 30 | 15 | 4,28 | 0,1 | 0,03 |
58 | @carterx7 | 23 | 17 | 28 | 9,67 | 0,22 | 0,03 |
59 | @dyuryul | 20 | 17 | 5 | 7,56 | 0,17 | 0,03 |
60 | @xpilar | 41 | 19 | 4 | 6,49 | 0,15 | 0,03 |
61 | @extrospect | 7 | 1 | 100 | 121,2 | 2,78 | 0,03 |
62 | @paco | 28 | 8 | 48 | 18,03 | 0,41 | 0,03 |
63 | @everittdmickey | 50 | 22 | 9 | 5,52 | 0,13 | 0,03 |
64 | @hanshotfirst | 28 | 26 | 1 | 4,71 | 0,11 | 0,03 |
65 | @creadordelfuturo | 30 | 23 | 5 | 5,71 | 0,13 | 0,03 |
66 | @jaytop | 27 | 26 | 28 | 6,14 | 0,14 | 0,03 |
67 | @dragosroua | 33 | 30 | 10 | 3 | 0,07 | 0,02 |
68 | @rebeccaryan | 17 | 15 | 25 | 5,28 | 0,12 | 0,02 |
69 | @bubke | 15 | 14 | 49 | 6,83 | 0,16 | 0,02 |
70 | @jwolf | 24 | 24 | 2 | 4,23 | 0,1 | 0,02 |
71 | @lyndsaybowes | 22 | 15 | 8 | 7,16 | 0,16 | 0,02 |
72 | @roadscape | 3 | 3 | 12 | 30,24 | 0,69 | 0,02 |
73 | @uwelang | 36 | 27 | 11 | 4,22 | 0,1 | 0,02 |
74 | @barbro | 22 | 15 | 9 | 6,85 | 0,16 | 0,02 |
75 | @raybrockman | 34 | 30 | 7 | 3,69 | 0,08 | 0,02 |
76 | @cryptoctopus | 9 | 9 | 5 | 8,1 | 0,19 | 0,02 |
77 | @htliao | 10 | 10 | 1 | 7,93 | 0,18 | 0,02 |
78 | @overkillcoin | 33 | 22 | 15 | 3,97 | 0,09 | 0,02 |
79 | @ctrl-alt-nwo | 31 | 17 | 1 | 5,13 | 0,12 | 0,02 |
80 | @kafkanarchy84 | 27 | 22 | 9 | 4,64 | 0,11 | 0,02 |
81 | @twinner | 35 | 27 | 1 | 3,88 | 0,09 | 0,02 |
82 | @libertyteeth | 21 | 14 | 12 | 8,22 | 0,19 | 0,02 |
83 | @steevc | 57 | 26 | 6 | 4,44 | 0,1 | 0,02 |
84 | @fulltimegeek | 10 | 7 | 3 | 14,29 | 0,33 | 0,02 |
85 | @ulfr | 25 | 12 | 39 | 8,5 | 0,19 | 0,02 |
86 | @onceuponatime | 5 | 5 | 14 | 18,21 | 0,42 | 0,02 |
87 | @davebrewer | 12 | 10 | 27 | 11,04 | 0,25 | 0,02 |
88 | @inventor16 | 29 | 24 | 50 | 4,1 | 0,09 | 0,02 |
89 | @acidyo | 9 | 9 | 1 | 9,55 | 0,22 | 0,02 |
90 | @enki | 10 | 10 | 4 | 3,44 | 0,08 | 0,01 |
91 | @double-u | 15 | 8 | 55 | 7,69 | 0,18 | 0,01 |
92 | @camilla | 6 | 4 | 52 | 7,36 | 0,17 | 0,01 |
93 | @transisto | 2 | 2 | 20 | 18,77 | 0,43 | 0,01 |
94 | @greenjuice | 24 | 22 | 5 | 1,98 | 0,05 | 0,01 |
95 | @joeblack1 | 30 | 12 | 1 | 2,21 | 0,05 | 0,01 |
96 | @lighthil | 9 | 5 | 100 | 9,9 | 0,23 | 0,01 |
97 | @riskdebonair | 8 | 7 | 65 | 3,94 | 0,09 | 0,01 |
98 | @quinneaker | 32 | 25 | 4 | 1,63 | 0,04 | 0,01 |
99 | @infovore | 6 | 5 | 9 | 7,62 | 0,17 | 0,01 |
100 | @elewarne | 9 | 9 | 100 | 3,24 | 0,07 | 0,01 |
101 | @rudystyle | 10 | 1 | 100 | 43,46 | 1 | 0,01 |
102 | @lightsplasher | 9 | 8 | 47 | 7,04 | 0,16 | 0,01 |
103 | @enomujjass | 28 | 20 | 8 | 2,44 | 0,06 | 0,01 |
104 | @nanzo-scoop | 4 | 2 | 26 | 30,33 | 0,7 | 0,01 |
105 | @richreck | 14 | 9 | 66 | 4,31 | 0,1 | 0,01 |
106 | @dexter-k | 28 | 20 | 3 | 2,68 | 0,06 | 0,01 |
107 | @dennisschroeder | 20 | 4 | 100 | 12,36 | 0,28 | 0,01 |
108 | @schamangerbert | 24 | 19 | 6 | 1,76 | 0,04 | 0,01 |
109 | @steemit-life | 17 | 17 | 13 | 2,25 | 0,05 | 0,01 |
110 | @stellabelle | 2 | 2 | 100 | 24,7 | 0,57 | 0,01 |
111 | @jiahn | 73 | 28 | 30 | 1,54 | 0,04 | 0,01 |
112 | @toktok | 10 | 10 | 28 | 2,6 | 0,06 | 0,01 |
113 | @meesterboom | 40 | 27 | 1 | 1,62 | 0,04 | 0,01 |
114 | @kus-knee | 14 | 12 | 3 | 2,41 | 0,06 | 0,01 |
115 | @klye | 39 | 26 | 2 | 2 | 0,05 | 0,01 |
116 | @lykencrypto | 14 | 10 | 51 | 3,03 | 0,07 | 0,01 |
117 | @enginewitty | 37 | 22 | 10 | 1,33 | 0,03 | 0,01 |
118 | @abh12345 | 65 | 38 | 11 | 1,2 | 0,03 | 0,01 |
119 | @tjpezlo | 16 | 11 | 100 | 2,78 | 0,06 | 0,01 |
120 | @surfermarly | 7 | 7 | 41 | 5,26 | 0,12 | 0,01 |
121 | @diskorvery | 8 | 5 | 38 | 7,45 | 0,17 | 0,01 |
122 | @uplus | 6 | 2 | 100 | 18,51 | 0,42 | 0,01 |
123 | @travelwithus | 52 | 34 | 35 | 1,44 | 0,03 | 0,01 |
124 | @geronimo | 17 | 5 | 79 | 6,3 | 0,14 | 0,01 |
125 | @thedamus | 33 | 18 | 44 | 3,91 | 0,09 | 0,01 |
126 | @mynewsteemit | 5 | 1 | 100 | 25,16 | 0,58 | 0,01 |
127 | @boatymcboatface | 8 | 7 | 10 | 5,1 | 0,12 | 0,01 |
128 | @steemit-health | 20 | 17 | 13 | 1,5 | 0,03 | 0,01 |
129 | @britt.the.ish | 11 | 1 | 100 | 39,24 | 0,9 | 0,01 |
130 | @jerrybanfield | 15 | 15 | 9 | 2,25 | 0,05 | 0,01 |
131 | @khaiyoui | 16 | 13 | 5 | 1,92 | 0,04 | 0,01 |
132 | @inuk | 28 | 1 | 100 | 26,05 | 0,6 | 0,01 |
133 | @paolobeneforti | 16 | 16 | 11 | 1,65 | 0,04 | 0,01 |
134 | @greatpath | 12 | 12 | 5 | 4,8 | 0,11 | 0,01 |
135 | @ryanhkr | 31 | 24 | 5 | 1,21 | 0,03 | 0,01 |
136 | @d-pend | 32 | 22 | 2 | 1,47 | 0,03 | 0,01 |
137 | @arcange | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0,06 | 0 | 0 |
138 | @kayceesuave | 1 | 0 | 100 | 0,01 | 0 | 0 |
139 | @goofyu | 4 | 4 | 100 | 0,64 | 0,01 | 0 |
140 | @roelandp | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0,29 | 0,01 | 0 |
141 | @bareknowledge | 2 | 2 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
142 | @raphaelle | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0,01 | 0 | 0 |
143 | @forcesteem | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
144 | @sauravrungta | 2 | 2 | 100 | 5,64 | 0,13 | 0 |
145 | @faranfani | 2 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
146 | @punzee | 3 | 3 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
147 | @chipnoreo | 2 | 2 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
148 | @pogoland | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0,06 | 0 | 0 |
149 | @bandana-gramma | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
150 | @smetana | 4 | 4 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
151 | @irfanullah | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0,01 | 0 | 0 |
152 | @darksamus288 | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0,01 | 0 | 0 |
153 | @alvorek | 2 | 1 | 100 | 0,02 | 0 | 0 |
154 | @gre3n | 3 | 3 | 100 | 0,09 | 0 | 0 |
155 | @andreacervantes | 2 | 2 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
156 | @tallyho | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
157 | @catchup | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
158 | @hot-girls | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0,09 | 0 | 0 |
159 | @disarrangedjane | 5 | 4 | 100 | 0,05 | 0 | 0 |
160 | @awesome-seven | 2 | 2 | 20 | 0,08 | 0 | 0 |
161 | @roncrowder | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
162 | @alex-icey | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0,04 | 0 | 0 |
163 | @emmadetemmy | 3 | 3 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
164 | @kbcndh6b | 2 | 2 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
165 | @ibklimpak | 2 | 2 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
166 | @jokerpravis | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0,26 | 0,01 | 0 |
167 | @sanj | 21 | 9 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
168 | @madhatt | 1 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
169 | @rulesforrebels | 2 | 2 | 64 | 0,18 | 0 | 0 |
170 | @zx9c99 | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
171 | @killuminatic | 4 | 3 | 55 | 0,25 | 0,01 | 0 |
172 | @nationall | 5 | 4 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
173 | @nickmorphew | 2 | 1 | 100 | 0,06 | 0 | 0 |
174 | @talk2momz | 2 | 2 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
175 | @earnonlinewith | 1 | 0 | 100 | 0,03 | 0 | 0 |
176 | @rickyadiputra | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
177 | @ali-butt | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
178 | @leaving-egypt | 3 | 3 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
179 | @harryp3 | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
180 | @kriptofondas | 2 | 2 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
181 | @motivator | 1 | 1 | 41 | 0,03 | 0 | 0 |
182 | @li21 | 2 | 1 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
183 | @rftube | 1 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
184 | @tom-stefan | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
185 | @alktoni | 3 | 3 | 100 | 0,31 | 0,01 | 0 |
186 | @alexandrecseco | 2 | 2 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
187 | @lelek | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
188 | @anubhavbhadani | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
189 | @argd88 | 10 | 2 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
190 | @rafalski | 1 | 0 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
191 | @africanlottery | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
192 | @sift666 | 2 | 1 | 54 | 0,78 | 0,02 | 0 |
193 | @necrophagist | 5 | 0 | 100 | 0,39 | 0,01 | 0 |
194 | @pcso | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
195 | @davidstrohmer | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
196 | @malonmar | 5 | 4 | 15 | 0,2 | 0 | 0 |
197 | @geneeverett | 3 | 2 | 34 | 0,26 | 0,01 | 0 |
198 | @biggeetx | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
199 | @shyuan | 4 | 4 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
200 | @mesbaimicta | 58 | 46 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Now you know all these heroes. Their daily work increases the interest in the discussion, gives hope to some authors, and some even a decent income. Their work attracts new authors in Steemit and makes existing users remain.
Information sources
All information is prepared by querying data from a SteemSQL - SQL database containing information from Steem's blockchain, as well as by calculations based on this data.
Special thanks to @arcange for SteemSQL and for the advice provided to me during the development of this project.
These curators are really legends and this quote below summarizes my thoughts.
They mosty make existing authors remain and earn a few cents.
Yes, they are doing a good job while we have not so good times in steemit.
Apart from all the spam and some fake accounts, is there something else I don't know about?
It seems to me that users do not actively vote for each other. They spend all their energy on attracting the attention of rich accounts
True! - I think there are some experienced users who are actively voting and making worthwhile comments. while the vast majority of new users are just posting rubbish and making a futile attempt to make a few cents.
But I'm not too worried because they have no voting power at all, and although they are irritating, I don't think they will last long or change anything.
In my case, it is all manual and i know the spam comments cos i am there in the conversation. I also look at intention and try sift good from the not-so-good. It takes work but it does work to keep the ecosystem going. Too, i don't want much community isolation and i try to spread votes a lot more in the comments, to reach as many steemians as possible.
Everything is very logical, any action carries a certain result, the more actions to maintain the ecosystem, the better for all participants.
The fact that you are number #1 and doing everything manually is really something special. From the top 10 I believe half are bots and it's likely the others are using something like steemvoter. Not that I say there is anything wrong with that, as it is a lot of work to do everything manually (I use it myself). But if more people where to do such an oustanding job it would greatly benefit the community!
Spreading vote across the conversation make people take conversation seriously
And exactly, that is where you are different, you do say “you are lazy to quit” and I realized that you always surface in a place to give encouragement, anybody you visit his/her blog will be happy together with those who left a nice comment too........ You are a blessing...... Thanks for never being tired to keep promoting the community, I hope to add you retain the number spot of this category
I agree with you. Most likely, many of them will soon leave
I have bots of some of this great curators voting me for some reason I am not sure,..probably will vote this comment...probably..maybe...lol so thank you for your bots in any case!!! :D
I can't believe it!
I'm grateful to see that we're having an impact and this is motivation to continue doing so. Congratulations to all, you have my seal of approval.My congrats to you too! 8)
Thanks for respect & highlight our names. Upvote & become to your followers.
Congrats
You too! 8)
Thanks for watching! 8)
Been too busy to do anything but curate lately..i cant wait to learn sql and play with the data myself. Thanks for the list
Thanks! It's not so hard. Try it 8)
Very happy for to be here. Thanks!
It's your merit 8)
Wayhay! I love rewarding comments!!
I can second that! Thank you!
Rewarding comments is one of my strong habits as well. My upvotes are not too strong though.
Still, it's the thought as well that counts!
My congratulations :-)
I am glad I am there. I am trying to do my best curating manually.
Thanks for sharing! Steem On!
And you have nice results with that. Congratulations! :-)
And steem on!
awesome effort keep up
Thanks!
Neat, I'm #82! :) Thanks!
Congratulations.
My congratulations! 8)
Very informative ! thanks for sharing
Thanks for watching! :-)
Maybe some of the curators on this list who read this post can help me out.
I have to vote at 100% hence my voting power gets sapped very quickly. What is the best approach to using the votes...is quantity or quality better? Do I run my voting power down hence not giving each person much or be prudent and give it only to prized posts?
Thank you for the post @boddhisatva.
It is very encouraging to see what the best on the site are doing.
I think when you get to 500 sp, you will have a vote slider appearing when you want to vote to manage power. You can then decide voting percentage. Different curators have varying interests when it comes to curation. So look for quality, some look at things beyond quality, like intention, effort, etc
Thank you for that. I powered up yesterday by buying some more steem so I found the vote slider.
It is interesting to see the different ways people approach voting. Some vote almost everything while others hold their votes and make them valuable. I guess there is so much good content on here that it is hard to limit it.
Thank you for your reply.
That's great! I will aim for that!
It all depends on how much you want to vote. The more posts you want to support, the less voice you need to use