I totally agree with this comment. While sock puppet voting is bad, self-voting does some good things for minnow curators. First, it helps keep them on the Steemit platform with the incentive of making SOMETHING! Second, upvoting one's own comment is a promotion in itself, moving that comment to the forefront. How can anyone expect to ever get ahead when the can't play by the rules currently in place. I have taken the liberty of upvoting myself, mainly because I spend a lot of time creating posts without the benefit of receiving a lot of upvotes. And I do always share my voting power though. I DO NOT self-vote low effort comments though. Steemit is a two way street and until the rules change, it is what it is. I believe that once an account reaches certain thresholds, curation algorithms should change. The $800 self-written check should be a no no!
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I choose not to upvote myself. On the other end we should disable it if we don't want people abusing it. I prefer to leave the choice to people, like you did.
That is one solution. But we also don't want to forbid investor to join and back the system. We maybe are pushing a certain role to some people that do not want to play that role.
If I may ask, how do you feel when you spend over two hours creating a post and you get two votes? Both from bots? It is disheartening and it has happened to me a lot. If my efforts were better rewarded, then maybe I would not feel the necessity to upvote myself and I could save my voting strength for others. It can go both ways I suppose.
Let's say it's even worst for because what I care the most about is the comments and the interaction. So this is even worst, even though we are paid to comment (my first payout ever was a comment). Upvoting myself doesn't help since the feeling of loneliness won't fade for the $$.
That might be only be me.
Ha, a lengthy post with no Upvotes and NO comments is pure loneliness!
Turning investors into curators, for example.
Thanks!