You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Moving to hive
If you were chosen to be excluded by curie perhaps your opinion of them would be different?
Having been excluded from the very beginning, i was here when they started, they can kiss my,....
Excluded? Curie, to my knowledge, excludes nobody. There was an upper reputation limit but even that is no more. There are guidelines, however, put in place to make sure the deserving user gets the vote, given the economics of voting power. But please how were you excluded?
This is an ongoing dispute between me and the reward pool rapists, it began when they announced that only approved speech would be promoted.
If you care to take the time to look back to see my posts about this topic from the fall of '16, be sure to reference the links so that i can use them in some new posts.
I know what happened, and dont care to waste my time looking for the posts.
Curie was invented to pick winners and insure losers made no rewards on platform, it continues to do so today.
Although i have reason to believe they did find some shame, at some point, and stopped acting so shamelessly as to vote themselves exhorbitant salaries from the reward pool on crap posts, but they have never supported dissenting opinions that i know of, and certainly not mine.
So, again, @curie, and all the other gangs that pick winners and losers, can kiss my,...
It seems you have some deep hurt feelings from the past, that I am not aware of. While I am not interested to dig into the past to find out your reasoning, I can assure you Curie's mission was and remains to be "discovering promising authors with quality content that add value to the platform who constantly create quality content without much success and empowering quality curators". Curie tries to reach as many authors as possible with limited resources. I hope to connect more with you in the future, and perhaps you can tell me the stories of the past.
Wonderful, would you care to opine on my content?
Perhaps you would be more comfy with my nonprofit, they are less contraversial?
@freebornsociety
lol most of your posts look like fall under politics or steemit related categories. Those wouldn’t fit the guidelines. Following you to get to know you and your works, but not for Curie purposes.
Exactly, but when @curie votes it's favorites the votes i do get are diminished in proportion to the sp involved.
When a whale votes everybody else loses money.
Dont believe me?
Ask @paulag, she didnt believe me either.
Thanks for what attention you give me in the future, if any, but the effort you put into @curie is taking bread out of my mouth, so forgive me if i dont stop proclaiming that fact.
Like i forgive you for hiding your head in the sand to get your own bread.
I noticed that pending rewards keep changing. Although I don't have full understanding of how it works, I am aware that votes in general on the platform affect that. But that is how system works, you can't blame Curie's vote for that.
There is absolutely no favoritism or deciding "winners and losers" as you said. There is curate-submit-review process based on guidelines which change all the time. Everything is based on meritocracy and transparency. Thanks to altruistic minded supporters and curators who spend countless hours Curie has been doing a great job serving the community for so long.
Anything I say wouldn't change your mind, since your view is based solely on Curie not voting for one of your post. I don't mind you speaking your opinion about Curie even if it is negative. I hope you would do it in a more fair manner :)
This made me laugh. Hope to get more laughs from you posts. Good talking.
I do try to make knowing me entertaining, glad you caught my humor.
Pending rewards change for a couple reasons, mostly price changes.
But if a large amount of sp votes, that effects payouts, too.
The way the algorithm works is that your share of the reward pool is based on the percentage of sp voting for you.
Ergo, if 1000 sp are voted in total and you have 100sp voting for you, you get 10% of the reward pool.
However, were a whale to vote 1000sp, making a total of 2000, your payout drops by half.
This means when curie, vote bots, utopian, dlive, or any of the other large sp holders vote, the few votes i did get lost value due to those accounts having been so favored.
By favoring some over others winners are chosen and losers are created by default.
I get less rewards because a gang has been favored with an sp delegation that, absent that delegation, probably wouldnt be getting voted, thereby increasing everybody's rewards, except those select few authors voted by the gangs/bots.
When curie said that my content didnt qualify and began doubling the sp being voted, causing my rewards to be cut in half, i took exception to that, still do.
I was very vocal against delegations being enabled for exactly this reason.
Had curie said that they would support dissent, and not just fluff, and still not voted me because my formatting sucked or my tone was too gruff, i wouldve been ok with that, but when they come straight out and say that they will only be supporting approved corporate speak, on a platform that claimed to support free speech, i lost it. Still havent found it, but now we got bigger problems.
So, no i wont be chànging my mind about them.
Even if they apologized and disbanded i still wouldnt say good things about them, except that they did find some shame eventually.
Now that you have been shown a broader view of the ecosystem, will you continue to support them in their raping the reward pool to favor some to the exclusion of others?