Do you know how often people feel they "need" support so go pandering to whales(the minority)while completely ignoring the majority? Then can't figure out why things aren't working out for them? Target the small group, get the small return.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Hmmm I never thought about it like that. I assumed the whale vote attracted other votes, hoping to get a piece of the whale vote?
That doesn't make sense.
I may misunderstand how curation works, but I thought people piled on and upvoted posts with large payouts because they get a percentage of the curation share according to their hivepower and when they voted. It was a system people gamed for maximal profit. At least that is what I read about how curation works. Am I wrong?
I am willing to learn.
Thanks
Yes, that's wrong. $1 vote gets the same percentage as a $10 vote before 24 hours. The only time one could potentially earn a higher percentage is if more votes poured in after 24 hours of publishing and those voters would get a lower %.
Wow. I have thought this way since Steemit time.
So early voters still get a benefit?
This was changed so long ago that I can't even remember when. You're considered "early" voting anywhere from the instant the post was published up to 24 hours. That time frame is treated the same.
And it's worth mentioning it's rare to see votes coming in after 24 hours. If one wanted to "game" the system a bit, they could find a hidden gem, vote and hope nobody sees it, then reblog the next day. That's really cheesy though.
So what would be an effective strategy besides voting early and reblogging after 24 hours, to maximize return?