Serious topic.
I've seen some critique lately on how people get downvoted for their posts, and how they are being "ripped off" or how they are "losing their income".
If you think like that, You are wrong!
Whatever you see here...
...does not mean your income for that post is 3.07 Hive. This is only the potential reward. The only reward you can call "income" is the one that is actually paid on the day 7, after the posting. The potential reward might jump, or it might dive, depending on how the post is received by those who read it.
This is what actual income looks like:
It tells you exactly how much was paid, and how much the author's income for that post was.
If your post gets downvoted, it does not mean you lost your income. You only lost the potential income.
Now, you might ask "what about when the potential was over $200, and it was lost?"
Easy. You were not entitled to that $200 in the first place.
Ask yourself: "Out of my own pocket, how much would I personally pay someone else for this same article I am publishing?"
Did this make sense to you?
The thing is, when You came to HIVE, nobody signed a contract with You over how much you would be earning, or what your income would be.
After all, the whole "potential earning" aspect of Hive comes only secondary to the other strengths of the blockchain; immutability, resiliency, and uncensorability.
And no, downvotes are not censorship. What you write on the blockchain, will remain there forever. That's a thing to consider.
If you read this far, I will thank you for your attention.
I'll be seeing you all later.
The Follow-up post The vote is not free explains why the upvote is not free, and why the downvote is absolutely necessary.
Well said and straight to the point. People just don't get it... It's not yours till post payout. Simple
Let us be honest. Most of us would not pay nothing. Fortunately/Luckily we do not have to pay out of our own pockets, when we reward others on the Hive blockchain.
That is exactly why it is so difficult for many to see the reasoning behind the downvote. Because voting seemingly doesn't cost us anything (it actually does*), we easily lose the healthy appreciation for honest work.
* The reason I don't think voting is free, is because we are currently doing, or have either done much of the work to cumulate our own voting power, or invested in it, or both.
My gran told me a few truths back in the day... before we wrapped people up in cotton wool..
society seems to think they are owed a living.... no.. go out there and earn one!!!
Excellent advice you got there! Got to relish the wisdom of grandparents, it is very rare these days.
it is... and where it is.. not many listen unfortunately
That’s cleared it up for me. I’m new here and I spotted the words “potential reward” and I’m fine with that. I think that’s an amazing concept. Too many entitled people these days, truth is they have to build trust and reliability first.
I think a lot of us can learn from hive!
Yep... And sometimes those downvote hits are for good reasons..
So much abuse here it's crazy
Gotta help those watching over the blockchain and get involved in governance.
My potential income is Build HP & Curation. I didn't thought how powerful it is until this year!
$WINE
Cheers~
Congratulations, @theguruasia You Successfully Shared 0.200 WINEX With @gamer00.
You Earned 0.200 WINEX As Curation Reward.
You Utilized 2/2 Successful Calls.
Contact Us : WINEX Token Discord Channel
WINEX Current Market Price : 0.342
I don’t think anyone was ever confused about the difference between income and “potential income.” I genuinely don’t. But I can agree with you in that there is a difference. I would, however, also say then that intentionally stripping away all of someone’s “potential” earnings on a post is still not particularly cool.
Yeah, well everyone is allowed to vote on that potential income, so I wouldn't say it is necessarily uncool either.
I would guess someone getting hundreds of dollars or euros for a blog post with almost no effort for original content is probably not okay by you either, unless it happens to you.
No, I tried to be clear, and specific. That was not an accidental omission. Although where I could have been clearer is in that I don’t disagree with idealogical downvotes, particularly since upvotes are doled out by that same measure. What’s not cool (and I want to stress, in my opinion), is throwing, for example, a $300 downvote at a $300 post. One vote wiping out the votes of many. I hope this helps, and sincerely, I appreciate you and your having a different opinion. These kinds of open and honest discussions are critical. Thanks for taking the time to reply.
#whoisalbuslucimus
10 votes from sbi wow! How many shares you have?
!PIZZA
I've been sponsoring many accounts during my stay here, but I haven't really taken a look at my own shares.
Wow 1506. I just started my journey of giving, hope so I reach your point one day :)
Oh, that's where it was! Thanks.
I sent you a share.
Thanks! I will encourage me to share more also. :)
!PIZZA
Yeah, i am agree and appreciate with you that before engaging in hive we never singed any where that are bound to maintain except few community joined. But the payout are maintained with few hive power holder and acting like god upon few minnows and others who can make passive income, anyway its very good analytical information upon a certain point.
This is simply not true. Most of the posts on Hive do not get downvoted by anyone.
While we can't control the whales on what they upvote or don't, we can control our own output. We can provide quality content, that gets upvoted by people. If the quality does not match the potential rewards, there is always the possibility, that the post will get downvoted. We already know that before we post.
This is why we can't make demands on the system, or those who oversee it.
You can try to game it, but it will eventually be your own downfall when you get found out.
Yes, I understand, and I believe all the whales understand, that with great power, comes great responsibility. Part of that responsibility is to be fair.
Which act do you think is more unfair, A) letting undeserving posts get huge rewards, while deserving posts get nothing, or B) downvote those who weren't really deserving of those rewards, and returning that value back to the system so that others who actually do deserve it, might get the chance?
Yeah, its true that content and post should be relevant with payout and great power comes with a big responsibility.
It is a post worthy of a hefty reward as it was informative and interesting. Thanks
Hey just lurking on this topic and giving my 2 cents of a user before signing off, it's interesting to see it like that splitted on peakd, it's the way it is (depending on the communities, etc).
"If your post gets downvoted, it does not mean you lost your income. You only lost the potential income."
I would put it more, "I didn't earn (nothing earned nothing lost) the potential income" because someone decided so. Also those downvotes i believe also blanks the curators money like you highlighted in that one so about half is from curators...
Not disagreeing with the downvote function btw, it's just how it is no ? I just don't like the FAT downvotes on journalistic articles / investigations, including medical information.
Great info , thanks for sharing
Only payout determines your actual income and besides those that upvote you, deserves to be rewarded too.
Those who scale through here, just enjoy doing what the do.
That’s why some curation trail follows them.
PIZZA Holders sent $PIZZA tips in this post's comments:
@dlmmqb(5/7) tipped @gamer00 (x2)
Please vote for pizza.witness!
I don´t agree.
There ARE cases of unjustified, sneaky, last-minute downvotes.
Just because this is fortunately not the rule but exceptions rather, there are attempt to mute people, just because they have different opinions.
Yes I understand your concern, as I too have been a target of such actions by whales. Nevertheless, I don't consider that out of the rules by any stretch of imagination. Anyone has the right to disagree with the payment at any given moment during the 7 day evaluation period.
It doesn't mean it is a winning strategy for the whale doing it either, and because votes are not really free, it comes with a price. If it is done precariously, it will directly devalue the whale's own investment, as people come vary of either posting quality, or posting at all.
But what I believe will eventually happen whether there are bad whales or not, is that when Hive will come more popular (think 5x, 10x users), the whale vote ceases to count, because of the sheer amount of minnows, little fish and dolphins will outnumber their originally huge votes.
We may still see $300 downvotes, but that will change as volume grows. The whales, orcas and dolphins will likely be busy downvoting normal spam instead.
All true, but when? Hive incl. its predecessor is >5y old. Will the numbers ever be 5x in this decade? Look at the current "growth rate".
The whales will still for a very long time dominate and be able to put off many people.
It's all okay to be pessimistic, but truth be said the whole crypto world is still very young. We've not seen real massive adoption yet. But I believe it will be coming sooner or later and the floodgates will be opened.
The hive account creation process is still a bit of a hassle, and there are also quite a few things we still could improve in the authentication process. So, while we are definitely making progress (Splinterlands et. al.), we are currently not even close to being ready for the big masses yet.
Excellent penetrating insight. Thanks for sharing brother!