Nothing you're doing is wrong, it's the fact that he's gaining a lot of delegations with the promise to vote up people 10-20x what they delegate which becomes wrong. The default consensus of voting is in general that you receive 50% curation rewards and no one minds it if you self-vote a few times per day on deserving content as long as you're actively using your stake to distribute it to other deserving authors as well. By delegating and receiving 10-20x vote back, or any vote really is just masking self-votes and in this example it's as if you're completely voting for yourself 10-20x per day which is unfair towards everyone else and at the same time new and deserving users who should be receiving some curation. The fact he offers such a high APR to delegators who don't post is just cause when those who post don't have any new posts out he maximizes curation returns by front-running popular posts.
TL;DR: you shouldn't expect votes back on your posts just cause you've delegated to an account. It's similar as some people who are just blindly autovoting other's posts just so they can get an autovote back from them and completely ignoring the rest of stakeholders and authors effectively just voting themselves 100% every day and getting both max curation rewards + post rewards when the latter should be earned from the content and other contributions than just whatever stake and voting power you have.
Hope that cleared it up a bit. This isn't the only example of this and I'm sure we're going to start tackling blatant vote-trading in the future as well. Here's an example of blatant vote-trading, no matter what he posts, what engagement he gets, etc, it's almost always the same users voting on him and he voting them back: https://peakd.com/@marfonso/posts
What I liked about hive.curation was the fact I could reward the followets/voters of my posts. And since I knew I'd publish daily, I thought this would be a good way to thank them.
Ironically, now that the voting will cease I think my rewards will increase actually. :)
I do understand your points, and it's good there are people like you who monitor the system to correct glitches or abuse of the pool.
However, one should be careful not to throw the baby with the water, i.e, not harming contributors like myself whose only "sin" is to want to be rewarded for their work (also through delegations).🙂
My two cents to the discussion. I will, obviously, follow any rules implemented by the witnesses. This is our community and it's our common interest to keep it alive and flourishing.
Yeah that's why I gave everyone time to rethink their delegations and what the issue is, even though I would've wanted to go downvote whatever he had voted up in exchange for delegations considering how he had given two 100% downvotes to a user with 5k hp who dared downvote his automatic post updates which I found disgusting. Instead I went and countered his downvotes and downvoted hive.curation's active auto posts (which he also decided to retaliate back on my posts with other people's delegation - such as yours) and I chose to wait it out and give everyone a chance to read for themselves and make their own decision. I'm sure there's better projects out there people can delegate to than one who only does this, especially with an owner who behaves that way.
My life experience tells me that any dispute can be resolved when there is will from both sides. I hope the same will apply here.
@Hive.curation has offered an unparallel APR of 18%, which is needed to carry on my social projects.
However, I do agree that good for one person cannot be based on harming others. I hope there is a win-win solution here.
I don't really understand how a certain APR is needed, when it at the same time means manual curators and others are the ones getting less APR since we all share the same rewardpool, but that's coming to an end with the next hardfork either way so no point talking about it. But yes, would've been nice if his actions hadn't been dirtier than any words I may use when calling out assholes like that, but I won't be as nice in the future if I see him or any other similar attempts to skew rewards in favor of a few so the main perpetrator can get a bigger cut at the cost of everyone else on the chain.