You are trading one set of rewards for another, it depends on which reward you find more valuable and which has a better return based on the effort you are willing to put in.
Okay I'm with you so far. Now my next concern is the health of those tribes/communities. Back when people delegated stake to paid vote service pools, that led to converting thousands of potential curators/consumers into only a few, and because of that, people left due to lack of interest. There simply weren't enough votes to go around and barely any eyes looking at posts since it was more profitable to look away. Will this vote trailing and curation placed in the hands of a few contribute towards stagnation again or will it go the other way this time?
This is mostly mitigated by using official curators that are voting purely. Along with voting for pools, you can vote for Curators to manage those votes. Right now I was voted as the #1 curator, and I give very healthy votes ($5+) to over 160 unique authors on a regular basis. I don't vote the minimum amount (few cents) to maximize curation. The curators chosen can be voted in or out as see fit.
So in theory, this should result in better voting and distribution overall, but it is early.
I vote manually and decided against creating alt accounts to handle the other community tokens. It's somewhat of a consumer's nightmare attempting to micromanage and get the absolute most out of all this, manually. That headache is actually what prevents me from diving in and grabbing more tokens since they'd just sit and there's no way for me to get around to everyone and all communities in a day. Needless to say, I am somewhat interested in this Bro-Fi approach, since there's no way I can keep up.
But the part about people getting paid all while potentially less traffic visits the sites seems kind of weird to me. Counterintuitive.
Anyway. Clearly I suck at being a cheerleader. Thanks for taking the time to deal with my shit.
I vote manually and decided against creating alt accounts to handle the other community tokens. It's somewhat of a consumer's nightmare attempting to micromanage and get the absolute most out of all this, manually.
I really hate the need to create alts to vote tribes. It's a horribly solution, to a horrible problem. As of right now though, it is unavoidable if you want to even remotely optimize your voting.
But the part about people getting paid all while potentially less traffic visits the sites seems kind of weird to me.
That's no different than any other form of delegation, you hopefully delegate your power to someone you believe will do a good job at voting in that community. After all voting is all about distribution. If the tokens get in the hands of those who deserves it, it doesn't matter who pushes the button. If they don't, well that is a problem and unfortunate one that is fairly common.
Yes but you get bro.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
You mean I finally get to have a friend to drink the beers with!?!?!?!
Hmmm. In all seriousness though. Isn't this like cutting one end of a rope off, tying it to the other end, then expecting the rope to be longer?
You are trading one set of rewards for another, it depends on which reward you find more valuable and which has a better return based on the effort you are willing to put in.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
Okay I'm with you so far. Now my next concern is the health of those tribes/communities. Back when people delegated stake to paid vote service pools, that led to converting thousands of potential curators/consumers into only a few, and because of that, people left due to lack of interest. There simply weren't enough votes to go around and barely any eyes looking at posts since it was more profitable to look away. Will this vote trailing and curation placed in the hands of a few contribute towards stagnation again or will it go the other way this time?
This is mostly mitigated by using official curators that are voting purely. Along with voting for pools, you can vote for Curators to manage those votes. Right now I was voted as the #1 curator, and I give very healthy votes ($5+) to over 160 unique authors on a regular basis. I don't vote the minimum amount (few cents) to maximize curation. The curators chosen can be voted in or out as see fit.
So in theory, this should result in better voting and distribution overall, but it is early.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I vote manually and decided against creating alt accounts to handle the other community tokens. It's somewhat of a consumer's nightmare attempting to micromanage and get the absolute most out of all this, manually. That headache is actually what prevents me from diving in and grabbing more tokens since they'd just sit and there's no way for me to get around to everyone and all communities in a day. Needless to say, I am somewhat interested in this Bro-Fi approach, since there's no way I can keep up.
But the part about people getting paid all while potentially less traffic visits the sites seems kind of weird to me. Counterintuitive.
Anyway. Clearly I suck at being a cheerleader. Thanks for taking the time to deal with my shit.
I really hate the need to create alts to vote tribes. It's a horribly solution, to a horrible problem. As of right now though, it is unavoidable if you want to even remotely optimize your voting.
That's no different than any other form of delegation, you hopefully delegate your power to someone you believe will do a good job at voting in that community. After all voting is all about distribution. If the tokens get in the hands of those who deserves it, it doesn't matter who pushes the button. If they don't, well that is a problem and unfortunate one that is fairly common.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta