You just happen to “manually” curate (at 3mins) some of the biggest voted posts in the Korean community?
There is nothing wrong with autovoting and I’m glad you make a return on your investment.. but for the love of god can you stop making posts saying you are doing so manually?
It’s insulting to the actual manual curators and pretty much a full fledged lie.
No need to lie, or make multiple posts about it.. curate how you want.. but I don’t believe there is anything “manual” about what you are doing ... and to say so is just silly.
Of course, I curate in the Korean community. I'm curating for the best efficiency as I say so in my post. I'm therefore trying to find posts that I think will do well.
I go through a lot of tags and look for posts in the 2-5 min mark first but also scroll further than that to find posts.
I do this multiple times a day.
If there are reasons for me to believe a Korean post will do well I vote for it, manually. I have my own metrics to determine whether I think it will do well.
Autovotes, I have turned off completely (since a couple of days). So no votes are going out to the same authors whatever they produce.
I turned it off because I noticed it wasn't as efficient for curating as before. If it was still efficient I would have left it on.
I do follow 2 curators with a small trail of 5%. It's so little I don't even consider it part of my curating efforts.
Every vote besides that is manually cast by me every single time.
I didn’t ask you if you curated the Korean community. I asked you if I was supposed to believe that you just happened to vote (at 3mins) some of the most well rewarded posts within the Korean community.
It’s very easy to find out what will do well as many get support (automated) by your old circle friends.. no matter the content. So yes, I’m sure it’s quite easy to see what will do well. It’s just not easy to believe you do so by “scrolling a lot of tags multiple times a day” and just happen to hit them all at 2-4 min mark.
If that is what you say you are doing, fair enough. It just seems quite far fetched.