Can you make money upvoting posts? Or even downvoting posts? Exploring other blogs makes you money too.
Exactly one-half of the steem blockchain is based upon authors getting paid for the content they create.
The rest of the value here, comes from curators, and investors.
Let's talk about curation.
Curation is like being a janitor. All of us are in charge of upvoting good posts and downvoting bad and cheating posts.
Now, most of us have no problem upvoting good posts. We do that, because, if we have a good post, we also want people to upvote us too. So we share the effort by visiting other blogs upvoting and commenting so we're seen and we're paying-it-forward by doing it for other people too.
What about downvoting? Why would you ever downvote someone? Isn't it just easier to walk away and let someone else do it?
As your reputation level increases. I think most people start at Reputation level (25).... being able to downvote because of your reputation level and steem power becomes more and more important.
Let's give some examples.
You are a Reputation level 48 user, you have about $700 worth of steem power. While you are looking around steemit, you see some newbie with Reputation level 32 (with steem power $42) plagiarizing, copying posts from the internet, and trying every trick possible to flood the blockchain with crap content.
When you downvote someone like that... This is what happens:
- (1) It is the responsible thing to do
- (2) Since a level 32 is so far behind you, even if they attempt to downvote your posts, it will not have any real effect
- (3) You can help the effort to curb their evil behavior "while it is still early" which may get them to stop
- (4) Since you are more experienced, you can explain to that person what they are doing isn't right in the comment, and maybe give them a link to a helpful page or post that goes into more detail.
- (5) A larger dolphin or whale user that comes upon the same post, sees you DID comment, and DID downvote that user who was basically breaking socially acceptable rules of the system, has a greater chance of upvoting your comment and following you.
What reasons does someone downvote a post? If you've never done it, this is the popup box that shows up:
So when you consider downvoting something, for legitimate reasons, all of us will appreciate it.. There's a couple things not mentioned in that popup box, that I'd like to add:
- (1) Only downvote someone that is several reputation levels lower than you (At least 5).. If you are reputation level 48, feel free to downvote someone level 43 or younger if they are obviously abusing the the trust bestowed upon them as a responsible steemian user.
- (2) Don't downvote immediately. Try and appeal to the person first. Explain what they are doing is wrong (if it is wrong) and give them a chance to correct their behavior. A couple of explanations and warning helps. Some people will listen. Some won't.
- (3) I know it sounds weird, but many new users to steem think they are the first one to figure out how to "game the system" for rewards with cheap content, copy/pasta (cut/paste), spam, running an amateur bot, or upvoting their multiple accounts. Once they are caught doing something wrong, soon as a spotlight is cast on them, the majority will stop right away.
So how can you make money downvoting? Or explaining to younger reputation users that they should behave?
If you are successful, that is one more new account that won't attempt to steal rewards from the daily reward pool that is allocated to authors.
It stops one person from doing it, another person from watching that behavior and saying "look at that guy. He's trying to cheat. I know how he does that... I'm going to do it too"
Abuse of the system these ways are like a fire burning on your stove. Do you put out the fire now, or do you wait until it grows and starts burning down the house? We have to keep stomping out these small fires as quickly as possible
Ok, what about upvotes, and visiting other people's blogs? How does that make me any money?
When you upvote a post, especially within the 10-30 minute period after it was written, and that post goes viral, if you were one of the first people to recognize it was a good post, you can make handsome curation rewards by doing so.
- OH! @intelliguy, I think I know what you're saying. I can just upvote as many popular posts as I can, and some of them will pay me well, right?
- NO. Not quite. You'll run out of voting power if you keep doing that. It also depends on how many VESTS you have.
VESTS? What is a VEST? I know what STEEM is, and SBD is, and STEEM POWER is... now you're talking about VESTS?
Steem Power that you hold (as a locked in investment until you power down) is quantified as VESTS. You might have only 500SP (steem power), but that is known as a very specific number of VESTS.
If you are a huge whale, with lots of SP (and also lots of VESTS) and you upvote a viral post early (10-30 minutes after it was posted) and contribute a lot of your voting power to it, and it gets a high payout, you also, gain a large curation reward from that too.
Q: Uhhh.. I'm not a huge whale, and my SP is under $500 worth, so that doesn't help me. How can I still make money?
A: The extra bonus of upvoting other people's posts and writing comments still gets you noticed. When someone comments on your blog, especially someone you're not familar with, have you ever read their beautiful comment, then clicked on their name and went to go see who they were? What type of stuff they write? Most of us do that... Human nature is to be curious
This is a lot to learn, can you summarize the basic points for me?
Yes.
- (1) Visit other people's good blogs, upvote them, comment on them, and help keep "good stuff" being valued high and appreciated on steem. This is my duty, your duty, and everyone else who uses steem to have as a duty and responsibility so good blog posts get rewarded.
- (2) If you happen to show up and see someone cheating the system with crap posts, intended or not, it is up to you, and me, and everyone else, to downvote or at the very minimum explain to them, they're not doing it right, and by constantly uploading bad cheap content, it hurts everyone equally.
I already know this is a complicated subject, so please ask your questions below, and I'll do my best to answer them.
Can you make money upvoting posts?
A: Yes, depending on your steem power, or if your comments are upvoted and noticed.
Can you make money downvoting posts?
A: Yes, a downvote to a scammer, means they won't make very much, which means more good rewards for everyone else who is acting properly and making good posts has a better chance of getting paid better. (including you)
Let me give you one last example:
Just recently this user comment-spammed my wallet named @oguzdelioglu and here was his comment:
So with the help of https://steemd.com/@oguzdelioglu
I was able to trace his tracks and history.
He is a new account, this month, created September 2017.
He claimed he didn't spam anyone.
Yet he has over 800 posts (comments + articles) in less than 30 days. It turns out, he was using a BOT to automatically run around upvoting people's posts with generic comments, hoping to make automated curation rewards and build followers.
@oguzdelioglu is from the country Turkey. He's a gamer, and SEO person, and a programmer. He's under 30 years old, and he thought with his technical skills he could write automated bot scripts to make money while he slept.
He started with reputation level (25) and now he's reputation level (-1) now.
He thought he could gamify this blockchain to his benefit, with his technical expertise, and when it didn't work as expected, he figured he'd wallet-spam all people with reputation level (60) or higher. That didn't work either. Experienced users investigated his username and saw where he ran a bot and was trying to cheat the system.
His last words in his latest blog posts were removed, and edited, and he replied in turkish:
bunun farkındayım ve bir daha bu şekilde davranmayacağım.
translated into English it means:
I realize this and I will not behave this way again.
What does that mean? It means that my efforts, @pfunk's efforts, and a half-dozen other people with high reputation downvoted his post and explained to him that trying to cheat the system in the first month you are here is a terrible idea.
I'll refer to this bad situation as an accident scene.
I was on the accident scene with comments and downvotes to take care of this, and explain it to him, when @pfunk doing his regular monitoring of the situation, saw me there already and upvoted my single comment to almost $10 USD
At this point, it wasn't about money for me, doing what I did.
I just wanted to stop the spam and the possible cheating of the system.
Shouldn't you want to help do the same?
I don't worry too much about curation rewards, but I enjoy being able to give people something with my vote. If I vote up the good people then they gain more SP that they can use to do the same. I've delegated some of my SP to others so they can do the same. We need to encourage good content. I will flag persistent spam and abuse, but I have managed to persuade some people to change their ways with comments. They just see others spamming and think it's okay to do that.
This is fantastic, and a great comment @steevc -- you're doing it exactly right. I'm glad you spoke about it. As users get higher reputation levels, it is something we all should do
We can all help Steemit to develop. I don't like to see people give up on it.
Helping others grow will eventually add up to our growth as well. Caring and sharing is the Mantra of a community.
I agree, this is what I feel is important. However, the point you make about "vote up the good people", is curation, provided you are not voting up the same people every time. Then that's nepotism.
Vote good content, flag bad content, support new authors when you have the time. That's my method. And I think we are very similar, @steevc. Great comment!
That's a good point. I think his comment about upvoting good people, he probably meant "upvoting good posts created by good people using the system correctly"... but that's so long winded and lengthy. Sometimes it's easy to shorten comments and miss a few words.
Alas, good clarification point @evolved08gsr - I've upvoted quite a few new users in my past. Many of the became more popular and grew faster on this system than me and are level 70+ while I'm at level 66. However, if they deserve it, they truly deserve it, even if they are a low reputation level.
Some may be nepotism, some is certain people put out great posts or comments over and over.
Thanks so much for explaining this, I have no problem flagging these individuals and have done so recently. Not doing anything encourages them and others to scam the system. In the end it hurts all of us to stand by and do nothing. Steemit doesn't need those types users, so it's our duty to get them to cease and desist. This post is resteemable!🐓
This is very well written. Although curation is less than 25%, especiallly when hundreds of other people are curating the same posts as you...
We need to improve that percentage back to 50% - I agree, most people don't put a lot of time or effort into curation, and if they did, it would benefit everybody at the same time.
I feel like I've had this conversation with you in the past? You've been in favor of the 50% curation. I still feel like curation is too easy to manipulate (bot voting, auto-voting curation trails, etc).
I would personally like to see an alternate method used to calculate curation rewards. Something more complex, like the percentage of votes you make toward a single author, or the percentage of votes you make on authors who you have followed for less than 7 days, or something more than simply clicking the "upvote" button.
Also, if you upvote content 1 minute after that content was posted, and the post is half as long as this one, there's no way the person read the post, so they aren't technically "curating", but they're simply trying to earn rewards from the post. So maybe include an algorithm that calculates the number of words in the article and the number of seconds a person spent reading it before they upvoted it? Sure, this could be "gamed" also, but at least it's an added layer of "defense".
I know you would, and so would I... however. Machine will never beat the human greed instinct.
We can keep writing complex algorithms to try and automate the prevention of abuse and human greed. However, artificial intelligence systems can only do so much.
This is a social media platform, with humans participating... At some point (especially now) we need to identify what is socially accepted and what isn't.
Steemit/steem is still in BETA mode. The added layers of defense are only added layers but not fully defensive. :)
For this particular topic discussion, the general point has been made. Let's work with what we have at the moment.
(Which means, let's all use human power to decide what is good and what's not, and upvote or flag accordingly)
I do appreciate your comment...
Quickly: To me, it's not necessarily trying to "beat" human greed, but to Deter. If someone has to spend a significant amount of effort up-front to create an algorithm to "beat the Steemit defense", there are going to be fewer occurrences, and they will be easier to identify and manage.
Anyway, I'll leave this discussion for another post.
Agreed!
Amazingly well-written post with a bunch of great information! I definitely think the voting system on Steemit is still in it's rather raw form, and especially in it's current state, Steemit users, as a community have to enact disciplinary action upon behavior which does not help the community as a whole. There will forever be new waves of users find ways to game the system, and improvements of the reward systems will definitely help, it is still up to the community to make it work. Steemit is a value-based economy, and no policy or system can ever truly derive what true value is, that is left to the human mind to discern, which is the foundation of how we will make this community work! I hope to see more amazing post from you!
Personally, i'll always check Steemians's content when I don't know them and they post comments under my posts before I upvote them. Especially their comment history section, sometimes is see copy-paste comments and know straightaway they are just fishing for easy upvotes!
Yes, that is a really good tip too! Nice!
When I come across good content like this I just have to comment, upvote or resteem. I try to do at least 1 of the 3. I am new to steemit and spend a lot of time here learning. I will have to refer back to this article from time to time because I want to know how to be a good author and curator. I read a lot of posts that interest me everyday and I don't open some because of not being interested in them (at this time but my taste may change so I can learn other things). I have been around for 18 days now and I came across a post that told me if I mention @cleverbot when making a post or comment the bot would respond back and upvote my post. Is this considered spamming a blog?
This what I have learnt from Curation rewards on Steemit:
Each post reward is split 75% author, 25% curator
After 30 minutes and more = ENTIRE portion of that 25% goes to the curator PERIOD.
27 minutes and 30 minutes past the time the post has been made live, will be split 90/10. 90% curator and 10% author.
15 minutes and 27 minutes of when a post is created. 50% curator and 50% goes to the author.
3 minutes and 15 minutes after post publication. 10% curator, author receives 90%
3 minutes after the post has been up. 0% curator, 100% author
Yes, okay.
People only caring about how much they get paid would worry about this... I purposely did not bring this up, because I was trying to encourage people to do the responsible thing, and flag inappropriate content, and seek out good content.
...and not focus on every action they make on steemit depending on what time it is...
I've commented on posts 8 days after it was made. I've commented on posts 1 minute after they're written. I know the mathematical algorithms and I still do that.. Want to know why? I'm a responsible user of this system that doesn't always do what makes the most money 100% of the time.
Do you agree that we have a social responsibility to act well on this system, rather than paying attention to how many minutes a post or comment is before we do something?
It's like when you figure out the "optimal" strategy in a videogame but then you realize that the strategy is boring as hell, so you just decide to have fun even if you don't get as many points or finish the game slower.
Very very good post. What you've said is very true. Am a newbie on steemit and there is this urge to want to grow big fast, truthfully I succumbed to it for some time, but truthfully I've stopped. My followers hip has stopped increasing but am happy am building the steemit community and site. Thanks for your efforts. 💪
Your honesty is admirable. Thank you very much. :)
Thanks
Thank you
This is an excellent post explaining curation. I have upvoted and resteemed. I think there are a lot of newbies like me that would find this helpful.
As in any other media, content is king and good content providers are the ones who make Steemit grow faster. Helping select those good content providers with up and downvoting is a great way to organically filter the good ones.
Thank you for the detailed post!
I definitely need to start taking these pointers into my Steemit life.
I have never down-voted any one,but when the time comes i will do it.
The reasons you gave for down-voting is what i will base before i spoil someone's day!
I actually see many authors here who earn from curation rewards mostly.
They rarely make posts,but keep looking for great content to upvote.
This rewards are handsome on authors with a high Steem Power and not us newbies.
Thanks for this well documented article of curation rewards,stay blessed.
It doesn't surprise me that many people earn mostly from curation. For me personally, I find it easy to comment or vote for the same reason that it's really easy for me to ask questions in class or engage people in conversation. However when it comes time to actually create stuff, I have no idea what to write.
Hi @intelliguy,
I liked your post a lot, so I reviewed it in my curation #8
I hope you will have the time to visit and let me know what you think :D
A very informative and well-written post, with a wealth of information that should be part of the basic tutorials for all minnows, and beyond. I believe that many of us do not fully understand the ins and outs of curation, and while there is some spotty information here and there, as well as some vids on YouTube that touch on the issue, this is the first time I've read any in-depth posts about curation.
I'll be looking for (and forward to) more such posts.
This is really great i just learnt some lessons. i think this is an ideal post for most newbies.
Thanks so much.
This is a great post for new users so sharing it to others! Thank you for putting it out here!
Very good
Never thought of flagging this way before. I thought I would be violating freedom of speech. I never downvoted even spammy comments. So this is something for me to think about.
Good post.
It is hard to do the first few times. I probably flag someone only once or twice a month. However there are obvious times to do it, and when it is needed.
Free speech is not what we're flagging. If isomeone has a difference of opinion that is NOT an allowable reason for a flag or downvote.
So don't worry.
It's for abuse of the system.
Let's give an example.
Let's say a rally was organized in your city. There was a stage and a microphone. Every member of the public got an opportunity to have 15 minutes to share their view of some topic in the microphone.
Right in the middle of someone talking, some drunk maniac runs up to the stage, pushes the person talking to the ground (hurting them in the process) and starts howling into the microphone for the next hour and yelling random junk and laughing about it, and screeching terribly. People walk away until he's the only one left.
Wouldn't that technically be violating freedom of speech too if people stopped that person?
Thanks for the response! Not many bother to answer in detail.
I guess it's also a temperamental thing for me, I find it hard to do! Even in your example I'd probably just leave and let someone else handle it! :P
But I get your point. I'll try! At the very least I'll have someone to tell when I notice something! ;)
Btw, I just remembered, I think it was you, in a recent belated introduce-yourself post, you recommended or mentioned The Knick, I said I'd watch it, I did! Good show! Wouldn't say it's an argument against medicine tho. It was the necessary step to get to where we are...and we're still not there.
Is @mahmoudh someone who should be nuked? See his spammy comments: Great post. Great post. Great post. Gif. Great post. ...
Yes. He's posting videos from this person:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-f5nPBEDyUBZz_jOPBwAfQ/videos
Named Brandon Kelly CryptoTrader on Youtube, who is NOT @mahmoudh
So he's stealing content, and reposting it as if he owns it.
He writes and speaks in Egyptian Arabic, english isn't his first language so rather than write posts, he'd rather just steal other content and upload cheap crap here himself.
Good detective work! .. So, do I report him to cheetah, or steemcleaners?
I would try @sherlockholmes first
Let him know that the vlogger he's stealing content from has 12,000 followers on youtube and that vlogger talks about cryptocurrency. This would be pretty upsetting for that guy to know @mahmoudh is stealing his videos.
@intelliguy Thanks for the informative post. I was unaware of most of what you covered. I think this post will help my Steemit life be a more productive experience.
Thank you for your explanation on curation. I've been slightly confused about how the upvotes and downvotes translate to rewards. There seems to be some complex equation or algorithm to calculate it. And because I'm not really good at that, I didn't want to worry too much about the rewards. I upvote whenever I genuinely like an article even if right now my upvote has little value. I think regardless of the money value, having votes will definitely motivate the author to write more good posts. :)
This is fantastic and exactly what i was searching from many days ! @inteeliguy you are awsome and i upvoted & Resteem your post and start following you !
Thanks for writing up this post! Very informative. And I was just starting to wonder about the ups and downs of upvotes and downvotes, and happened to see your post. Having newly acquired a 50+ rating, I will more diligently try to vote every day. 20 votes per day is the most efficient voting amount, right? I read that you can give no more than 5% of your voting power to any single vote.
A wonderfully useful post!
My understanding the underlying mechanisms of Steem is dodgy at best, but you expained (with practical examples) in a clear and concise manner!
THANK YOU!
Good post hitting a lot of very relevant points!
I always take the time to read all the replies to my posts and reply and/or upvote them - it doesn't take too long at the moment ;-)
I don't get too much spam, although I guess it will go up as I power up. Will have to think more actively about downvoting - am yet to even give a downvote.
Thanks for the article!
Very good amount of information. I learned a few things
One question: how would you proceed with steemit-users posting a lot of conspiracy-theory stuff (youtube-videos and copy/paste content) – would you also downvote them?
I was not sure whether I should downvote them, because after all also conspiracy theories fall under the freedom of expression.
But then again, they're polluting steemit with these kind of thoughts, potentially dragging likeminded tin foil hat-brothers with them, which will be having a bad influence on the tone of voice in the community.
If you ask your question again the following way, I can happily answer it. In this particular case it isn't the content that is the issue as much as it is this:
How would you proceed with steemit-users posting a lot of youtube videos and copy/paste content would you also down vote them?
Unlike Facebook, when you post something, it only goes to your friends and followers....
On steemit, it gets published to all steemit users in the "new" feed.
So the idea of reposting existing content on the internet (copy/paste), including youtube videos, just to recycle material here and get a few more views and get paid, is not appreciated.
it doesn't matter what the youtube videos contain. If you're simply just copy/pasting youtube into steemit and that's it... with no value added content, or making something unique to go with it... Then yes, it could be good reasons for flagging it.
Remember, we're not flagging different opinions. We're flagging abuse of the system for which it was not intended or designed to handle.
Downvoting is not used to decide the proper "tone of voice". You already know that I'm sure. I suspect your baiting me with these questions.
Thank you for your answers.
In the contrary – I was really interested in hearing your opinion on the matter, since I'm still quite new to this community and I find it sometimes hard to draw a line between what is considered worth flagging and what is still considered appropriate. Your answers give me a framework for the future to decide whether flagging or not.
Really appreciate this post intelliguy. I'm still somewhat new (sort of) trying to learn exactly how this all works. Most of the stuff you said I kind of already found out by now, but it's nice to have it solidified in for sure and it's definitely well written for others to understand 👍.
One thing I've yet to figure out though is what happens to the rewards after X period of time. Say 10 days go by and I upvote a post. Where does that money go?
I've seen posts well beyond the "10 minute - 30 minute" magic window, but I still think the post is quality and worth the vote so I do it anyways because I want to support the info I believe is quality. So yeah...don't know if I should or shouldn't, but it naturally seems like the right thing to do...no?
actually the magic window starts from 30 minute onward, if you up-vote a post immediately almost all of your curation reward will go to the author.
A post will pay out after 7 days, after that there's no new rewards for curators or authors.
At my first day, I fantasized about joining the content police and reporting spammers left and right, but reading on the topic, I realized: without steem power, all I'll be doing is shooting blanks and gathering zombies on my door step.
guess it will be a long time before I can hold against angry spammers.😋
Very well explained
Thanks for teaching us!
Keep it up
Congratulations @intelliguy! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Award for the number of upvotes received
Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOP
Hi there a nice and thorough post. Tried to follow your instructions on this post I wrote. It is an analysis on future price of Steem as India joins the party. But it somehow is not trending !! Just a quick view and any shortcomings in writing style or presentation would be welcome. Cheers and Regards.
Well, what canI say! That is detailed post about curation. The explanation about the nits and grits of voting and down voting are very detailed for newbies. Great content.
I'm very new to steemit and have discovered some great quality content and comments, and am happy to see very little spam so far (although I'm already starting to get annoyed by comments left by bots). So in a sense I agree with your argument here, but on the other hand, isn't this up-voting and down-voting a disguised form of censorship? That's a question I've been asking myself, after reading a few books by E.M Nicolay about the nature of our multi-dimensional reality. What we consider good or bad in this reality has no value judgement in higher dimensions, we're just here in this lower dimension to experience and it is our choice whether we take the "positive" or "negative" path; they are equally valid. You justify your voting behavior based on whether the system is being abused but who is the judge of that? I hope you don't take offense of this reply, this is something that is currently on my mind, and I truly don't have a good answer for it yet.