curation payouts
Hello Dear @steemchiller
I love your tool sreemworld. I am very new here and I thought the tool was good for helping me understand how to earn curation rewards. As you can see from the screenshot it looks like I was doing well but only a small percentage of the rewards end up in my account. Are you using different calculations than Steemit? I am getting maybe 1 in 5 or six payouts
After putting ib so much effort I feel very disappointed
Apparently at our respective rep levels and my current steem-power, I can boost your rep 0.009 with a single vote.
My vote does not move your rep visibly
lol .777
I was reading your exchange with the mark.
That is the kind of thing that sparks him off and he does not let go easily as you know
Eh, if they just make-up the rules as they please and enforce them capriciously (making exceptions for their pals and sycophants) and refuse to explain their criteria (PRIMARY AXIOMS) and people are afraid to even ask simple questions, then, well, I'm not sure there's much hope of a "fair" system emerging from this chaos.
We in complete agreement my friend.
I keep getting an error, "missing posting authority" when I try to post on hive, is this something you're familiar with?
Yes try entering your posting private key
You may need to log out then log back in or you be using PeakD which is not very consistent. I find it more reliable to use https://hive.blog/
and you may not have the Hive steemworld yet https://beeme.icu/?account=liopgiczombie
I have been poking around and have noticed vote bots. I was not a fan as I 'feel' that it does not enhance the attractiveness or sustainability of Steem. If everyone is paying for votes its not going to enhance a supportive community image. I am hoping you may be able to contribute some logical thinking to strengthen the argument against bid bods and selling votes in general.
The dust sweeper idea seems to deal with an inequity that should not be so I do not believe it should be included in the same category. Any thoughts you can add? If you see it as just boring shit that is rattling around in me head i will not be offended lol
I believe bid-bots and pay-for-votes uses the same principle as pay-for-banner-ads.
Removing bid-bots and pay-for-votes (and self-votes) only helps consolidate power in the hands of the oligarchy.
A "better" system would be to allow anyone to set their vote value (boost) by directly spending some of their wallet steem/hive "cash" to give their own or other posts the attention the voter believes it "deserves".
Last time the bid bots were acceptable, it was the oligarchy who owned them. themarkymark berniesanders therealwolf etc. There were many smaller ones as well, but the lions share went to the very top lions. Or is hyenas a more apt descriptive? I think so.
I believe passively accepting vote selling would be a huge mistake in terms of engagement and growth of the platform. Unless we put up significant resistance this trend will grow.
From my perspective it is better for everyone on the platform if those votes were given freely.
I believe the decision to remove vote bots was a sound decision. Even the Hyenas could see it was damaging the platform as a whole, and they were profiting from it in terms of Steem accumulation.
I agree that it is a good idea to have the ability to promote something we feel is of general importance, however bid bots are not very useful in that regard. Maybe there is a better solution than vote bots for that problem ? I think there is.
I did reply to the mail. It showed up in my sent tab, will send again shortly.
Over time you have bought my awareness to a problem I have lol
Have you noticed that if you disagree with a point I am trying to make, that I do not usually counter your argument?
That is not a trivial matter for me. Thank you
I will spare you the detail
send me an email if you get a chance.
That did not work then?
you could always try my name
Address not found.
Check your [old] secure memo's if you get a chance.
I have sent you mine on hive memo as the encrypt function does not seem to work here. You may need to enter your active key to read it. I checked with the test send and i can not read it so it works.
Also I am unable to read the old encrypted memos !
I sent a test email to the address in your memo.
I just replied again look in you spam folder
Check this out, I'm a subscriber:
https://steemit.com/dustsweeper/@dustsweeper/dustsweeper-faq
Rep (45.997)
You're officially bloom-proof.
lol not sure about that
Y U no post?
lol the truth is my brain has not been in good shape of late.
A few months ago I ended a relationship with someone I am completely addicted to. Its the most painful experience of my life. I know it needed to end but that fact does not make it any easier for some strange reason. Not even other women have made it easier, if anything I think it made it worse lol. Life is strange
I hope you feel better. Close relationships are extremely rare and valuable. Losing someone is probably the most painful of human experiences.
That is such an amazingly kind and thoughtful gesture. Thank you so much.
Yesterday I had been thinking about you. I was thinking that I wanted to thank you for the question ''why u no post''. Just answering the question honestly to myself and articulating some of that to you lifted my spirits a bit.
And then you add to that with the unexpected delegation. I cant thank you enough. I am guessing the number has significance and is not entirely lost on me. But if you want to expand I would be very interested
Thanks again for everything, thanks for being you
I'm currently conducting some delegation experiments. I'll try to make a post about it at some point if I find anything worth sharing.
I will be very interested to find out what you learn.
Thanks for your encouragement.
I have been thinking about opening an accout called the-rational-burn-post-alternative.
Is it unreasonable for me to assume that you may be interested in a conversation about such a thing?
I'm always interested in a conversation.
What's your idea?
Open an account with a suitable name, the-rational-burn-post-alternative or whatever.
Construct a coherent message against burning steem
establish how much Steem the account should operate with. Delegate everything above that to small accounts, helping them grow.
I like the idea of delegating to small (active, not-a-robot) accounts.
yep that makes sense.
The name should be as short as possible and self-explanatory if possible.
Perhaps "resource-rescue-squad" (it's a good idea to sound positive).
The "the-rational-burn-post-alternative" could be in the intro post.
Maybe, "welcome to steem!" would be a reasonably positive tagline (that shows at the top of the main blog).
@trufflepig has an open-source robot that someone could program to scan the blockchain for new accounts (less than 30 days old) that are using up their resource points by making posts and comments (not just voting/downvoting/resteeming).
Then it could steemdelegate (stedel) at least 111.111 to that account.
I believe a good baseline balance to run the account would be about 1500 steem.
Anything over 1500 would be delegated out to maximize encouragement to new steemians making a good-faith effort to share their personal opinions.
If an account goes silent (for 30 days), or goes into pure upvote/downvote/resteem mode, the steemdelegation (stedel) would be reassigned.
I'd even be inclined to reassign the steemdelegation (stedel) if they downvote more than ten times.
I have been thinking about the alternative to burn posts.
Do you thinlk it would be possible to create an account that required more than one user to move steem power / power down and things like that. while one person is able to perform the mundane daily tasks.
I am thinking that some like yapabmat would have the skill to create something like that. What do you think ?
I like resource-rescue. the squad at the end not so much but I am not so picky.
Assuming it got enough support delegations of 111.111 would be great.
If it gets any supporters maybe they would like to nominate people to delegate to?
Yes, well defined terms of the delegation might be wise!
its 3 06 am I just woke up and just had to have a look : )
Congratulations @hone.heke! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
You can view your badges on your Steem Board and compare to others on the Steem Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPTo support your work, I also upvoted your post!
Do not miss the last post from @steemitboard:
Vote for @Steemitboard as a witness to get one more award and increased upvotes!
From what I see, your vote is too small, and sometimes it doesn't go beyond the payout threshold. There's a formula to it, but I'm just too damn lazy to dig it. Generally, the current working model for me is to make sure at least 0.002 going out, so I can already collect back my 0.001. and if it is a comment upvote, I need to vote at least 0.040 so I can collect back 0.020. Having said that not many will upvote a comment, I tend to avoid comment voting at all. Hope this help.
Posted using Partiko Android
Are you voting for the hostile witnesses as some sort of protest?
Everyone running 0.22.5 is a justin sun sock-puppet (all of these are running on the same server and the accounts are less than 4 days old with (25) rep).
Current real-time witnesses (with version numbers) - https://steemdb.com/witnesses
I've marked the hostile witnesses with red.
IMAGE SOURCE
Interesting. I know they are socks and i know who owns them.
My thinking is that the previous witnesses made a big mistake when they froze the Stake.
The understanding which came from valued-customer is, there is another player who was part of the ninja mine and that player uses his stake for whatever he wants, including voting for witnesses.
I do not trust that player has ever had any good intentions toward Steem / Steemit. He needs to play both sides and can not afford to be to blatant about it.
I would like to see Justin regain control of the Stake he purchased. I am thinking that he is a business man, and he wants Steem to be successfull so he can sell much of that stake.
If Steemit is to grow, imho the rules need to change somewhat.
I am also open to other points of view if you have some to share?
Are you going to accept votes any time time soon?
I agree 100%.
But my understanding is that the "soft fork" only restricted witness voting, and did NOT restrict The Sun from "selling or transferring steem".
Justin has de facto 100% control at this time. We're running HIS version (0.22.5), so, the "soft fork" is no longer in effect.
The Sun wants to gut the steem blockchain and turn it into a subdivision of TRON with highly centralized control (he did a similar thing to TRON users). The Sun doesn't care about existing steem users because it has enough money to pump up an advertising campaign to funnel in a brand new herd of sheeple.
Only if they revamp the voting system so all these hypocritical "libertarian" vigilante jackals will stop belly-aching about their private-magical-community-reward-pool-pie.
Even a token (0.001) delegation is better than an upvote.
My understanding is that now they have 4 or more witnesses in the top 20 again they can block anything he wants to do.
When you put it like that, it sounds ominous. On the other hand more users may need to come from a change in how things are run?
Have you looked at project hope ? I would love to hear your take on these guys. Talk soon I hope
ah is the witness vote a problem for you?
I need to get to sleep : ) Its good to catch up with you.
Nobody can change the version (currently 0.22.5) without 17 witnesses, so it's essentially a stalemate.
The Sun is probably sitting on some reserve steem-power and could probably boost his puppets up to 17 if and when they wanted to make a change (to block all other witnesses permanently).
It appears to be a noble effort, but I currently believe my meager steem-power is better deployed assisting individual accounts.
Not really, it only really "matters" if you have 100,000 steem-power or more.
I just wanted to understand what you were thinking.
Thanks for your time and consideration.