Sort:  

Cause the latter loses ocdb all curation rewards?
I don't think we should discourage manual votes even more, some accidents happen sometimes we're all human. Downvoting wouldn't null all returns.

So you care more about your own curation rewards, than doing the right thing, got it.

If you had a few brain cells left you could easily compare how low ocdb's apr is on hivestats compared to others meaning we don't usually care about that and often vote on posts after 24h as well if they're underrewarded. Not to mention how little of ocdb's rewards go to me.

Doesn't matter, ocdb still made a big mistake and refuse to correct it. Your delegations should be revoked.

lol, sad little man.

Is that what you say when you run out of arguments?

Is that what you say when you run out of arguments?

That seems to be the pattern.

King-Acid-Bot's most common response seems to be "Enjoy being irrelevant," but as long as it's an ad hominem or some name calling, or blanket lies, he's happy to throw 'em out there.

It's pretty obvious what your motive is here so I'm going to stop wasting time on grudgy hasbeens.

If you had a few brain cells left you could easily compare how low ocdb's apr is on hivestats compared to others



Ya... OCDB's curation APR is really low compared to others...

It's about 0.7% off of the 9.5% that curators are supposed to get AFAIK, maybe you've been too busy voting up declined reward posts for attention and yourself to get downvoted that your APR is that low. While we don't actively focus on maximizing APR and often vote on posts that are past 24h, etc, we still curate manually and attempt to not overreward users so that's probably why we still do okay.

image.png

Didn't you forget this one, snake?

It's about 0.7% off of the 9.5% that curators are supposed to get AFAIK

You didn't mention a "should be earning" - you said to compare it to others... and it earns a higher APR than most.

maybe you've been too busy voting up declined reward posts for attention and yourself to get downvoted that your APR is that low.

I've never been concerned with APR - because that is not one of the goals of @Abundance.Tribe

This conversation is about OCDB, and you claiming that it would have been a hit to your "already low" APR to remove your HUGE over-reward.

Didn't you forget this one, snake?

Didn't forget it, it's not a project that asks for or receives delegations from the community.

I can go find a bunch of other community curation accounts if you want...
Guarantee almost every single one earns a lower APR than OCDB does.

Last I checked it was at 8.5 and others were higher when I placed that comment, not sure the reasons it's gone up lately but it's not something we look at often.

Anyway, people noticed this post and downvoted it and as discussed with @ura-soul re-voting is already something being discussed to be fixed so not really interested in wasting more time discussing this with irrelevant people.

Cause the latter loses ocdb all curation rewards?

if you revoted with the stake that was unvoted then you would get curation from the new vote.. or does the system not return your vote power when a vote is undone? it's been a while since i looked at how that works.

I don't think we should discourage manual votes even more, some accidents happen sometimes we're all human. Downvoting wouldn't null all returns.

Almost no-one on Hive has the vote power to downvote a $600 upvote, so it's not really possible to undo the mistake with downvoting (without largescale organisation of lots of people for that purpose). I think 99% of people would just undo the vote.

lol you were literally crying about how much stake some people have and how that means hive is centralized a week ago but now barely anyone can downvote it down? Post has been on trending for a while now and aside from a couple snowflake attention whores no one seems to mind. It's a newcomer, let him/her enjoy the little RNG in curation. Not to mention one of the few ones who've actually bought hive and staked it up before posting.

Only about 5 accounts do large downvotes and only really yours has the power to downvote to this scale from what I've seen.

 3 years ago (edited) 

Not only do you lose the curation returns from the vote you removed (and voting power) but the next vote won't give you any returns either (it all goes to the other voters on that post). Something already in talks to fix as many can't really recall what the purpose of it was to work this way to begin with, most likely anti-botting during the front-run reward era.

Fair enough, I do recall now from learning about this on Steem - I presumed it had something to do with putting people off of upvoting to get reach and then unvoting to use that reach somewhere else. Otherwise a post could be upvoted to the top spot, get a bunch of votes due to the exposure, then be unvoted and rinse-repeat - the same vote power boosts up a load of posts without ever actually being intended to result in a reward payout from the upvoter's own HP/stake.

Yeah, that could be one thing, another could be if it were to return you voting power as well when you unvote, then those wanting to maximize would spam vote on each post, then unvote if it didn't get other voters on top when the curve wasn't linear and rewarded front-runners.

Yes, it's not perfect, but on balance not returning the vote power when a vote is cancelled is probably a good idea.