I have a question! Why aren't people upvoting after 30 minutes?
Perhaps I've gotten it wrong, but if you upvote after 1 minute, almost everything goes to the author. At 30 minutes most goes to the curator, and this is true for upvotes AFTER 30 minutes as well. So it would seem that the most lucrative way to upvote is to upvote at 30 minutes or later. But why are so many upvoting at 30 minutes exactly and almost NEVER later?
I've almost never received an upvote after 30 minutes. Is this because people believe that after 30 minutes they will not get curator-rewarded? Or is it because they are so altruistic that they don't want to make money?
I've been wondering about this for my entire "career" on Steemit - why, even if a trending post or hot post (I often have posts in the hot section) never receive any votes after 30-35 minutes? They can stay in the hot for hours and not receive more upvotes.
Why do you think that is?
Check out @abh12345 he makes a lot of great post regarding curating:
https://steemit.com/bisteemit/@abh12345/steemit-curation-league-week-6-can-t-stop-won-t-stop-dontstopmenow
Here is a cutout from this post
"Voting in the first minute will earn you a curation reward of almost 0.000
Voting between 1 and 29 minutes will earn an increasing % of the curation rewards split, this value peaking at 30 minutes and remaining the same from this point onwards
The goal is to get in prior to the big hitters, but not too early in that your % in the 2nd point isn't too low (e.g. 15 minutes - approx 50%)
It is commonly suggested that 20-25 minutes is the 'best' time to vote (especially on known power-authors posts because they are likely to have more auto-votes coming in at these times - and you want to be ahead of these votes)
A vote of equal weight and equal Steem Power at 30 minutes will give more reward than a vote at, for example 1 hour - first come first served, but don't arrive to early :)"
Hope this answers your question
So there is basically bigger incentive to give votes before the auto-votes coming in, than after? That makes sense.
And the reason no one is voting after 30 minutes (even though it is profitable) is because there is larger incentive and more profitable to move on to the next post which is in the 20-25 minute interval and do the same thing there instead of voting on posts that are 1 hour or 3 hour old?
@dandesign86
Exactly ! Yea it's quite smart actually what @abh12345 reccomends. In the end one of the most important things is also that our votes are seen. Me being a minnow I can't vote too late it might not be appearant that I voted st all
Thanks for this refresher on what I learned a while back but definitely lost track of. You just got a tiny mattgoat, but it's all I got!!
My pleasure. You should thank @abh12345 he is the one who wrote this. He has great posts on curating I can recommend it
most of the voting is done by bots.
perhaps their programming hasn't been updated since the last hardfork?
Plausible! Any statistics on how much voting is done by humans vs bots?
95% bots..
Based on...feelz?
based on what one of the stat guys said just after the DDOS attack.
When the DDOS attack occurred humans were pretty much shut out...bot's don't access the blockchain via a gateway (Steemit.com)..they accesses it directly via the cli-wallet.
One of the stat guys ran a differential integrative regressive analaysis and determined that the number of votes during the DDOS attack remained the same....
...with no humans voting..
So.....
Wow..That's a lot of bots? Is that great?
I'll have my machine get with your machine on that...
differential integrative regressive analaysis???
I just voted you in 45th minute of your post 😁
The thing you highlighted is damn true.
It often happens with me too
Thanks for upvoting and commenting! And for making a point! ;)
i think thats wrong!!!
after 30 minutes dont you get the curator rewards???
I can't find any info that confirms that statement?
It's not that voting on post after 30 minutes don't give you any curarion rewards.
It's that voting on post which already collected a few dollars reward don't give you any rewards ( unless you are a whale)
I think it's a function of the feeds being overrun with content to send posts quickly into the abyss of unread posts due to the constant re-feeding of new material. Unless people are actively scrolling down quite a while, or actively following you in a manual fashion, then it's SOL. There should be a better way to sort in the feeds or filter. The brute force of scrolling down through spam to try to find anything worthwhile usually gets interrupted by or refreshed back to the top.
Yeah, but even my post which are in the hot section for hours (days?) never receives any upvotes after the first 30 minutes. It's like people believe that they won't receive any curation reward after 30 minutes?
No clue then. I particularly have no experience in having any hot posts, so I suppose that you can be thankful that you're doing something right. All of my posts, except one that went trending per a curie nomination, have been in recycling bin. I generally feel that most posts have a few minutes of potential fame, unless they're resteemed by a big shot or hit the trending by a whale's good graces.
I haven't been doing that great..I use boosters etc to get into the hot section and I rarely make a lot of money on my posts. I have only been investing into Steemit and so far I've lost money on the platform :)
But read my answer to dandesign86 comment. I think we might have an answer!
Not that you need it, but if you want to generate a bit more SP/SBD, go on a commenting spree in niches you're passionate about. I don't make much, but I make a lot more than my blogs in a more engaging and intellectually stimulating way by connecting with others on a direct level than hoping they trip on my post because I have a catchy pic or tagline.
Yeah, but it's about time as well. I got a limited amount of time to spend on Steemit (work-investing-family-exercise) and I really enjoy posting content. I know I should comment and engage more on other peoples stuff (but at least I engange and comment and upvote peoples comments on my stuff) :)
I think that the people who usually upvote before 30 minutes have passed are mainly minnows like me whose vote has almost no value and therefore it does not make much sense to wait.
Yup. And me, because im such a nice fella
I know you are :D
i think it's a wrong approach, i don't care about 30 minutes or 6 days if i like the content i upvote it, i think all of us will continue to work in this way whenever we see a good content upvote & comment on it so it will be shown up in the trending page and most steemians get's benefit from the post, Stay awesome and thanks for sharing
I must admit i DO care, and that I often vote for feed-posts that are 20-30 minutes. But I also actively upvote new posts that I enjoy and that are topics I agree on to give those people a boost and some hope that they are able to make money here. Nothing I like more than giving a minnow a 100% upvote. (I'm a minnow myself, but perhaps a bit larger fish)
that's the way to do it my friend, stick to your great rules and it surely helps the overall growth of the steemit.
Thanks bro!
Trying to figure out the whole curation game is more time than I'm willing to spend for the kind of return I get in terms of SP.
I'd rather spend my time reading quality posts and upvoting/rewarding the author.
That's the kind of return I like getting for the time I spend on Steemit.
Word
I think Steemit are incredibly greedy. People want to win with every action, even if they are a few cents, which I find laughable, for example, I am aware that my vote does not contribute anything, I vote for every publication that I find interesting, regardless of whether or not I go to win by curation. For example I voted for this publication 11 hours later, sometimes I give votes to publications that are 5, 6 days since they were published, and in a few cases I give a kind of honorary vote to old publications that were published more than 7 days ago. I've never really tried to complain about it, because everyone can do what they want, but in a personal way it seems to me that many of the voters are quite greedy.
Greed is normal..and although most steemians talk like true altruists, they act selfishly. Which is good and healthy. BUT, they dont think two steps ahead. We want this platform to attract new people. We want people to make a few bucks so they stay and curate and create.
If we all just act selfishly short term..we lose. We have to think selfishly long term..whic means we have to do some acts that might seem altruistic, but in reality the acts are selfish as well- just in a longer timeframe.
We are unfortunately thought to misinterpret we are thougjt to see things in left right, black or white, good or bad, right or wrong, selfis or altruist or rational, irrational.
Good is sometimes bad. Its all situational.
Yes, but I think that a new user who has a vote as insignificant as mine, and who is starting in the community, would be better if people voted for the content and not for healing, because by cure can only earn a few fractions of a dollar, and if your content is good you could earn much more. I do not see the sense in which small fish try to win by cure more than greed.
img credz: pixabay.com
Nice, you got a 4.0% @minnowbooster upgoat, thanks to @scandinavianlife
Want a boost? Minnowbooster's got your back!