You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Potential Payout Changes with HF 19 Launch

in #hf198 years ago

I'm all prepared for a massive drop in influence! My VP is currently averaging ~50% from a couple hours of curation every day, so ready to see it dip down into single digits within a few hours of HF19. Sadly, this hardfork means the death of active curation and collaborative curation. With 60,000 posts and comments to vote on, 10 is basically nothing. Will be 100,000 soon, the rate at which it's growing. When the HF19 was proposed, this number was 10,000. So it's a very flawed limit, really.

All power to the casual minnows, then! I just hope they don't keep piling on votes for Trending articles / auto-vote bots etc. (They probably will)

This will be a very significant change. I was linked to a trending post that misunderstands the change. The voting landscape is such that a majority of the votes come from minnows and dolphins; most whales are inactive. (even before the experiment) Essentially, the minnows will start squeezing dolphins and whales from the reward pool.

Sort:  

You can solve the 10 votes problem by lowering your voting power.

With 2 MV I am not a dolphin by any means but I will keep targeting posts with a small amount of votes. One month after HF 19 I will re-evaluate my voting strategy and the ratio of my liquid steem vs my vested steem. Let's see how this works out.

That's the best way to do it! Vote on posts with low rewards that are great and have a chance of getting more votes.

You should be able to say vote with 25% instead of the now 100% power and other than the square difference it should still be the same no? Just a thought. Use 1/4 of the power you would normally use.

Like I mentioned elsewhere, yes, but my influence is being diminished. Either way, it's beneficial to take your voting power down as low as possible, as each vote costs less the lower your VP.

those who has high VP will have to start from the beginning after HF19. The voting strategy would change. target would be those post which has fewer rewards/votes.

I like this and might try

It is a hard decision to make between the power-curators and the casual users. In a way, it is a zero-sum game between the two parties (in the context of this parameter). I do agree that this is a big hit for people like you that take the time to actively curate. I know there is a lot of doom and gloom surrounding the HF, but I don't think it is going to be as devastating as people are making it out to be. We need people to take the time to hunt out good content, but we also need a large user base to feel involved with the site. Being able to vote on content and influence rewards is one of the biggest aspects of the site, and it needs to be something that is appealing to the masses.

@timcliff

Nothing in this post is 100% for certain.

that's scary for #1 then

am curious about what the effects of #4 and #5 would be.
Thank you for this post!

that's scary for #1 then

For #1, I am 99.999% sure :)

am curious about what the effects of #4 and #5 would be.

Me too!

I'm optimistic, and understand why these changes were made. My only concern is that now that minnows have orders of magnitude increase in influence, they need to be aware about how the curation rewards system works. Since my posts on curation rewards, I've chat with dozens of newbies both here and chat, and it seems painfully obvious most would simply pile on the votes for trending posts thinking that's where the rewards are.

I'd consider leaving comments and downvotes on overrewarded posts urging minnows to curate responsibly after HF19. I know that'll be extremely unpopular, and I'm happy to stop blogging for a bit as this will make me vulnerable to flags en masse. But I believe it is crucial that if the power were given to the community, they be aware about the system and learn to curate responsibly. My posts don't get much attention, I'd be grateful if more influencers like yourself get the message across. :)

With Subcommunities, discoverability will increase a great deal, so I'm not worried about posts being lost like they are now.

PS: Whales have to learn to delegate responsibly as well, and not just their friends.

PPS: I'd like to see a dynamic voting target that scales with activity. Making 10 votes will be no good when the community has a million posts.

I like your "PPS" idea to set voting targets based on activity. I read a lot of posts and leave a lot of comments, as well as votes. And I vote at my maximum power for all those posts and comments. I guess I'll have to set my vote power to some percentage to have the same impact after HF19.

You make a good point, too, about minnows upvoting trending posts, especially since we have so many new folks coming on board. If the subcommunities come pretty soon, it might be all right. But until then, oh boy, we may be in for some surprises.

One of the mistakes newbies make is voting on everything like they're on FaceBook. I speak from my own experience here. The tendency is to start off upvote click happy, until you really start reading up and understanding how SteemIt differs from other social media sites. It takes a while to get the brain to shift into being upvote selective, especially when you bounce off here and back over to one of the other sites.

That's true. But then when people get the vote power slider, many go the other way and just put 1% of their vote power on everything -- and have almost no effect again. But that's part of what makes Steemit interesting. There's so much going on, it's like a whole ecosystem.

That is interesting. I haven't reached a level where the vote slider has appeared, so I hadn't given any thought to that side of the equation.

Is there any benefit to the voter in reducing the vote power like that?

meep

YES! I got a "meep."

Why does that make me happy?

It's just that it lowers the rate of using up your voting power. That means you can spread more around to more posts or comments. But each vote is then worth less. Some folks go crazy and set all their votes to 1%. But that means they would have to vote 400 times a day to use all their vote power. And they don't. So they just leave unused voting power in the payout pool, rather than distributing it around.

If you want to collaborate on a 'newbie friendly' guide to curation, I can work on getting it up on the Quick Start Guide. I agree that user education on what to do vs. what not to do would go a long way.

Sure, though I don't know how much we need to load that Welcome page? I'd be happy to collaborate, either way.

There is a section near the bottom with helpful posts from users. We can add it there (assuming the Steemit dev team approves). If you want to send me a draft over steemit.chat I'll review and provide feedback/edits. I think it would be a great post!

That's the best way to do it! Vote on posts with low rewards that are great and have a chance of getting more votes.

Edit: Really weird Steemit bug, the one where the vote seems to go on the comment below. Looks like the comment text box also got caught out by that. Meant to reply to the comment above this by onthewayout.

Resteem :D

You do realize that the voting power slider will still be there? After HF just use 25% power to get current 100% vote. Or am I missing something?

It's a limited reward pool, using 25% means your influence is diminished compared to the curator who continues voting at 100%. So, those voting more will start to get crowded out of the reward pool as their VP diminishes fast.

Yes, You are right. Actually, it seems that this HF has lowered the power of dolphins and whales both in quality and quantity.

This is something that I dont understand much. Can you enlighten me?

I'm still going to curate as much as I can manually... and I'll probably be casting many votes at 20% instead of full voting power. And I will try my best to find worthy lower reward content to bring it up.

I have no idea where my current +/- 11 MV fits in the greater context of whether I will feel like I have more or less influence... but hey, I believe in what Steemit is, and as long as the implementation of HF19 doesn't result in a complete clusterf*ck, it seems like it will benefit the platform in the long run.

Liniair curve I very much welcome.
10 votes per day I think should not have been implemented. Regardless of the fact the VP can be set to some percentage, eg 25% for 40 votes per day.
Trending page: yep, users like to vote for high value posts. I don't know the reasons, but money attracts money, I think that is one of the reasons, regardless what the results are. Another reason could be that those who are on the trending page are users with high influence and SP and a whole bunch of Steemians are trying to get the attention of the users in the top of the value and influence pyramid. I never analysed the voters but too be honest, I think there is quite a few voting ongoing towards same level and higher up SP users. Too many posts of small SP holders go unnoticed; Too many vote bots on high SP holders posts. I wish bots could be prevented.

Same authors will be settling on trending page with much bigger rewards. I wonder what would be the effect of this to the price of steem.