Are you saying this because they don't make money on their posts, if that's why you are saying this, they do that on purpose mate, so not to take away from the rewards pool you do realize that correct?
EOS is being created by the same guy who created Steemit, so he's not accepting payment for his posts.
Ned was downvoting stuff about EOS that Dan was posting. They have some kind of problem with eachother that is not known. Taking EOS off of here is due to that from my understanding.
If you noticed @dan has been powering down his steem and either storing it somewhere else or leaving this platform completely. I suspect it was due to the disagreement between him and Ned.
I am aware about he doesn't enable payouts on the posts about EOS.
Also, you really shouldn't be self upvoting your comments like that. Some whales are going to notice you at some point and start zeroing you out until you stop. This happened to me because I was doing the same thing 8 months ago. It is only a matter of time, there are self upvote tools that show people who do it and they regularly get zeroed out by whales.
Really, why does Steemit allow you to up-vote yourself then, why not just get rid of it?
Oh, and I really did not know that about Dan and Ned, which is a real shame actually. It's not good for Ned either, because Dan could easily create a Steemit competitor on the EOS blockchain.
Anyway, about the self up-voting thing, if they don't like it, they need to have the witnesses remove it. Also, I take Steemit 1 day at a time. If I get attacked by whales unfairly, I will leave and never look back.
It's not possible to stop self-voting because Steem has no account/identity constraints except stake. A block on self voting could be avoided by creating one posting account and another voting account.
There's nothing wrong with self-upvotes as long as the content merits the upvote. Voting should ideally be based on the value of the content, not bias for or against the person who posted it.
Too true, especially the part where you mentioned people having dual accounts, like how is anyone suppose to know whose account is whose, which is probably the reason why they just allowed self-up-voting from the start, to help prevent the multiple account issue.
But the bitter truth is that it's wrong for minnows but any whales can upvote their 2 words comment to hundreds of SBD and its fine nobody can talk about that.
It isn't right for anyone to upvote content that is spam/low effort and make lots of money. If the content is a well thought out comment with depth to it that adds to the conversation and you upvote it so that it rises to the top and people see it, something like that is perfectly fine in most people's eyes. Sometimes when you comment on something your response goes to the bottom because other people's comments are upvoted and yours isn't. Upvoting yourself in that regard to get attention because you want people to see what you add to the conversation and you think it is important they see it.
Now if you are just making comments all the time and upvoting them(regardless of if the content is good or not) then you are draining the rewards pool on spam comments. There isn't an unlimited number of Steem payouts. The rewards pool is what pays us all, if lots of people upvote themselves for spam comments eventually so many people will be doing that and taking the rewards away from the entire community. There are times when the rewards pool of Steem goes down by a lot due to bad actors, those bad actors are then found out by the whales and the whales will downvote bad actors so they don't get any rewards ever again.
Now if you are just making comments all the time and upvoting them(regardless of if the content is good or not) then you are draining the rewards pool on spam comments.
And who exactly is judge and jury on what is, or isn't a good comment... a slippery slope you walk indeed my friend.
Minnow spam isn't "reward pool rape". Frankly that is just a buzzword people use now to mean they feel they deserve that money.
Spam causes a problem on the resources required to run the blockchain. It has very little to do with depleting the rewards. As a witness when I see users spamming bloat into the blockchain, I often make it harder for them to continue.
Minnows self voting, or whales, doesn't bother me, and probably many others, very much. But like I said before anyone has to right to do as they please with their power. Which includes downvote, upvote, or spam. Just because you have the right to do it doesn't mean I don't have the right to attack it.
But like I said before anyone has to right to do as they please with their power. Which includes downvote, upvote, or spam.
That's another thing I believe the original anti-self-commentor failed to mention is that we only have so many votes per-day, which is part of the genius of Steemit, if there was no limit, then the whales would all be trillionaires!
Right, I fully understand we have a limited amount of votes per day, same as there is a limited amount of Steem that goes into the reward pool each day. When I look at your comment history I can see you upvote every comment you do, and believe me some dolphin or whale is going to notice you doing it one day and they would go after you. Since it is your right to upvote yourself(you are operating under the rules in this system) and it is their right to downvote you(which is also them operating under the rules in this system).
The only reason I am trying to alert you to this is because I did the same thing and rented steempower. I upvoted myself a ton 8 months ago. Then one day I woke up to someone 80,000 steempower making all my comments/posts go down to 0. There are a lot of tools out there that show who self votes and stuff like that.
I am not telling you what to do or what not to do. I am saying that those rewards you are giving yourself are not infinite, that it takes it out of the reward pool when you do that. Whales doing it is a much bigger problem because other whales need to get involved to nuke the rewards and stop that behavior.
I think it's more of a community cultural issue. If we allow spamming to be profitable, the sort of user we'll attract are parasitic spammers. If we attract enough of those they'll bury quality content, waste network resources, and eventually drain rewards and drive investors away.
And why is it necessary to upvote them to 160+ when there's no comment with more than $0.2 upvote...it's very right because he is whale with many accounts? Everybody is hypocrite and they see reward pool rape from minnows because..?
Now I may get downvotes for sharing this SS I don't know. I have already lost fait with this platform anyway.
Man, I saw it and I just wanted to know why he would upvote it to that much when a or two dollar upvote would take him to the top.
Whatever he does to fight with rewardpool rape, may be its for good but any person like me who doesn't know about much politics on this platform surely get that feeling he is the one raping the reward pool whenever she/she sees his activity.I am not trying to show he's bad,what would i get by doing that? I talk what I see and feel nothing much.You are a witness man, you are a witness, at least try to explain more politely if someone is saying something wrong
may be you guys could make a list of all of your good users with all of his works in a visible page so every new user can see it.
My thoughts exactly, because the only way people are going to stop doing this, is by removing it. I don't think they ever will though, because it is the number 1 incentive to buying more Steem, and without... I doubt people will even bother to buy it.
Now that could be a problem. If people only invest in order to vote to pay themselves rewards (which are funded through investment) then Steem will collapse as an elaborate Ponzi scheme. Steem is only sustainable if people value influence and having the power to shape what sort of content is rewarded in the community rather than just the power to harvest from the pool.
I've definitely been paying attention and have written about this issue in the past. Not all of them do, but certainly a lot.
I think a longer vesting schedule would do a lot to get whales thinking long term about the impact of their voting habits.
It's obviously unsustainable if the only reason people buy STEEM is so they can use it to upvote themselves for STEEM rewards...which they then sell to other people who are buying for the same reason.
Was thinking of trading some of my either BTC or Eth for Steem, but that would only be for the purposes of powering up, so that I could make votes worth a dang on the posts of others.
Are you saying this because they don't make money on their posts, if that's why you are saying this, they do that on purpose mate, so not to take away from the rewards pool you do realize that correct?
EOS is being created by the same guy who created Steemit, so he's not accepting payment for his posts.
Ned was downvoting stuff about EOS that Dan was posting. They have some kind of problem with eachother that is not known. Taking EOS off of here is due to that from my understanding.
If you noticed @dan has been powering down his steem and either storing it somewhere else or leaving this platform completely. I suspect it was due to the disagreement between him and Ned.
I am aware about he doesn't enable payouts on the posts about EOS.
Also, you really shouldn't be self upvoting your comments like that. Some whales are going to notice you at some point and start zeroing you out until you stop. This happened to me because I was doing the same thing 8 months ago. It is only a matter of time, there are self upvote tools that show people who do it and they regularly get zeroed out by whales.
Really, why does Steemit allow you to up-vote yourself then, why not just get rid of it?
Oh, and I really did not know that about Dan and Ned, which is a real shame actually. It's not good for Ned either, because Dan could easily create a Steemit competitor on the EOS blockchain.
Anyway, about the self up-voting thing, if they don't like it, they need to have the witnesses remove it. Also, I take Steemit 1 day at a time. If I get attacked by whales unfairly, I will leave and never look back.
A life lived in fear, is no life at all.
It's not possible to stop self-voting because Steem has no account/identity constraints except stake. A block on self voting could be avoided by creating one posting account and another voting account.
There's nothing wrong with self-upvotes as long as the content merits the upvote. Voting should ideally be based on the value of the content, not bias for or against the person who posted it.
Too true, especially the part where you mentioned people having dual accounts, like how is anyone suppose to know whose account is whose, which is probably the reason why they just allowed self-up-voting from the start, to help prevent the multiple account issue.
I technically have dual accounts as well, though my other account is used for a different purpose.
yeah check here https://steemit.com/downvote/@truthforce/hey-guys-i-am-being-downvoted-by-a-guy-with-80-000-steempower-just-wanted-to-ask-why
Well I was defending your right to do as your please but you kind of sound like Dan now
"I'm taking my lunch and going home!"
But the bitter truth is that it's wrong for minnows but any whales can upvote their 2 words comment to hundreds of SBD and its fine nobody can talk about that.
It isn't right for anyone to upvote content that is spam/low effort and make lots of money. If the content is a well thought out comment with depth to it that adds to the conversation and you upvote it so that it rises to the top and people see it, something like that is perfectly fine in most people's eyes. Sometimes when you comment on something your response goes to the bottom because other people's comments are upvoted and yours isn't. Upvoting yourself in that regard to get attention because you want people to see what you add to the conversation and you think it is important they see it.
Now if you are just making comments all the time and upvoting them(regardless of if the content is good or not) then you are draining the rewards pool on spam comments. There isn't an unlimited number of Steem payouts. The rewards pool is what pays us all, if lots of people upvote themselves for spam comments eventually so many people will be doing that and taking the rewards away from the entire community. There are times when the rewards pool of Steem goes down by a lot due to bad actors, those bad actors are then found out by the whales and the whales will downvote bad actors so they don't get any rewards ever again.
And who exactly is judge and jury on what is, or isn't a good comment... a slippery slope you walk indeed my friend.
This is kind of right but mostly wrong, IMO.
Minnow spam isn't "reward pool rape". Frankly that is just a buzzword people use now to mean they feel they deserve that money.
Spam causes a problem on the resources required to run the blockchain. It has very little to do with depleting the rewards. As a witness when I see users spamming bloat into the blockchain, I often make it harder for them to continue.
Minnows self voting, or whales, doesn't bother me, and probably many others, very much. But like I said before anyone has to right to do as they please with their power. Which includes downvote, upvote, or spam. Just because you have the right to do it doesn't mean I don't have the right to attack it.
That's another thing I believe the original anti-self-commentor failed to mention is that we only have so many votes per-day, which is part of the genius of Steemit, if there was no limit, then the whales would all be trillionaires!
Right, I fully understand we have a limited amount of votes per day, same as there is a limited amount of Steem that goes into the reward pool each day. When I look at your comment history I can see you upvote every comment you do, and believe me some dolphin or whale is going to notice you doing it one day and they would go after you. Since it is your right to upvote yourself(you are operating under the rules in this system) and it is their right to downvote you(which is also them operating under the rules in this system).
The only reason I am trying to alert you to this is because I did the same thing and rented steempower. I upvoted myself a ton 8 months ago. Then one day I woke up to someone 80,000 steempower making all my comments/posts go down to 0. There are a lot of tools out there that show who self votes and stuff like that.
I am not telling you what to do or what not to do. I am saying that those rewards you are giving yourself are not infinite, that it takes it out of the reward pool when you do that. Whales doing it is a much bigger problem because other whales need to get involved to nuke the rewards and stop that behavior.
I think it's more of a community cultural issue. If we allow spamming to be profitable, the sort of user we'll attract are parasitic spammers. If we attract enough of those they'll bury quality content, waste network resources, and eventually drain rewards and drive investors away.
And why is it necessary to upvote them to 160+ when there's no comment with more than $0.2 upvote...it's very right because he is whale with many accounts? Everybody is hypocrite and they see reward pool rape from minnows because..?
Now I may get downvotes for sharing this SS I don't know. I have already lost fait with this platform anyway.
Did you even click the link in the screenshot you posted. The user is transisto and the explanation for the high upvote is in that link.
That particular user is fighting reward pool "rape" by taking rewards from the pool and giving them DIRECTLY to valuable authors and developers.
One of the best users on this platform, yet you use his actions in a screenshot like they are bad.
Man, I saw it and I just wanted to know why he would upvote it to that much when a or two dollar upvote would take him to the top.
Whatever he does to fight with rewardpool rape, may be its for good but any person like me who doesn't know about much politics on this platform surely get that feeling he is the one raping the reward pool whenever she/she sees his activity.I am not trying to show he's bad,what would i get by doing that? I talk what I see and feel nothing much.You are a witness man, you are a witness, at least try to explain more politely if someone is saying something wrong
may be you guys could make a list of all of your good users with all of his works in a visible page so every new user can see it.
My thoughts exactly, because the only way people are going to stop doing this, is by removing it. I don't think they ever will though, because it is the number 1 incentive to buying more Steem, and without... I doubt people will even bother to buy it.
He can self upvote his comments all he wants. The problem is when you do it to a ton of comments that don't add much value.
But guess what? It is his Steem power to use as he wished.
Fuckin' A right it is my friend, and in my opinion, if people couldn't up-vote their own shit, would anyone actually buy Steem?
I think not!
Now that could be a problem. If people only invest in order to vote to pay themselves rewards (which are funded through investment) then Steem will collapse as an elaborate Ponzi scheme. Steem is only sustainable if people value influence and having the power to shape what sort of content is rewarded in the community rather than just the power to harvest from the pool.
Wow, you obviously have not been paying attention, all the whales up-vote themselves, why else would people buy Steem?
I've definitely been paying attention and have written about this issue in the past. Not all of them do, but certainly a lot.
I think a longer vesting schedule would do a lot to get whales thinking long term about the impact of their voting habits.
It's obviously unsustainable if the only reason people buy STEEM is so they can use it to upvote themselves for STEEM rewards...which they then sell to other people who are buying for the same reason.
Was thinking of trading some of my either BTC or Eth for Steem, but that would only be for the purposes of powering up, so that I could make votes worth a dang on the posts of others.