Hehe, yes, I will look at upvotes too in the near future. That's high on the list of priorities. Thanks for the links, I remember those reports, yes - there isn't anyone doing what paulag used to do - I'll bare that in mind :)
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Could you also add or display how rewards are separated by beneficiary? A community account for curation may set beneficiaries for the posts they created which current tools only register as if the account receiving the votes are the sole recipient even if rewards are distributed to more accounts on a single post.
Account X could get a lot of votes but rewards are split between multiple accounts as beneficiaries and this may lead to false impressions for people not looking into that minor detail.
What would be the aim of creating a report like that?
If I have a curation account that I self vote on, not trying to break it down to rewards received by set beneficiaries on the post is misleading. If some large community curation accounts vote on their own posts, the rewards don't go toward the curation accounts (depending on proportion set) they go to the curators that made up the curation compilation or whoever put in the work to make it happen as an incentive.
Accounts like ocdb votes on itself, but most overlook that the beneficiaries of those reward don't even go back to ocdb but to the curators that put in the work. And this goes for all curation accounts that set their curators as beneficiaries.
Ah I see, ok - I hadn't noticed that they were setting beneficiaries in that way. I'll bare that in mind when I get to making reports that are relevant.
The funny thing about this is that OCDB also goes and intentionally downvotes other communities and curation groups, that also beneficiary out their rewards... Without any justification or explanation.
I think they recently downvoted their own post too? but that happens rarely as well. And they also didn't provide any reason why they downvoted their own post.