I have a proposal for steem power rental market. Please give me your comments on it when you have a chance. Thanks,
https://steemit.com/steemit/@atomrigs/proposal-steem-power-rental-market

I really like this idea. @smooth is a very innovative whale and wisely gives voting power to multiple users.

I've benefited as much from his comments as I have from his upvotes (both are always appreciated). You know if you have made a post that @smooth upvotes that you most likely have taken your blog in the correction many people wish steemit to continue towards.

I think whale votes are sometimes double edged swords. 

For some it is a big motivation to receive a whale vote on a comment and pushes them to write continuously valuable posts and comments. But for others sometimes getting a whale upvote on their #introduceyourself post gives them the feeling that everything will be smooth sailing (pun intended @smooth). Not getting a whale to vote on a second article that a user has spent a lot of time on may make them bitter and start to badmouth steemit.

A lot depends on the outlook of the user and whether the see a way to make a quick buck or a valuable long-term investment. 

I think generally @smooth is spot on with decisions he makes and would definitely be interested in seeing what comes of this.

I would rather not get the vote at all than to be played with in that way. If the post isn't worth voting for then vote for something else. If the post is worth voting for then let the blogger get the payout.

hi there that was a really interesting read thank you for sharing. many people get upset by the whales but most of them mean well and are trying to help out. one should never make assumption from what one sees but try to understand and see what is deeper down which could be hidden if one isn't looking hard enough

I would be happy if i would get only one vote from a big whale.....

This approach leads to the manipulation of public opinion.  Technically it is censorship.   This website has appeared recently, and many have not yet realized its totalitarian character.   Or there will gather some representatives of the Republican party.  Either will need to change the voting system.  Why you need a resource?  When you go ahead a few people and all other users follow them like sheep!

I smel blood
<a target='_BLANK' href='https://ipfs.pics/QmWVWtLXPVKFpZz36gZtT6r9eVZq7FRF2pr4PTvGYonrnt'><img src='https://ipfs.pics/ipfs/QmWVWtLXPVKFpZz36gZtT6r9eVZq7FRF2pr4PTvGYonrnt'/></a>

That is an interesting way to do things, and it's nice that @smooth reached out to you on the chat to correct you.  

Getting eyes on posts is so important, because people pay attention to the trending large payout posts and even if the big payout is removed after a while it still has the benefit of having sent more views and many more small upvotes from minnows and dolphins. Most people don't have time to sift through the new posts not in their feeds and so one 'whale' vote brings a lot of exposure and name recognition.

It seems that an author's reputation matters more than the content delivered and hope that we can figure out a way to change that and make it more equitable.

Content is greater than the author and it must be treated as such otherwise the little guys will go away...

Gosh, I wish a whale would have done this for my posts. I could have gotten more views, and maybe taught people a bit more. For now my audience is small, but I will keep trying to grow it. Hopefully people will continue to find my posts interesting as they have indicated in the past!

Hi Ollie,

i think this could go hand in hand with the new slider for adjusting voting power.
a whale could vote early and than if the posts goes too high, he could remove the vote and revote with 10% of his powers.

this way the user will still have his vote, but he doesnt have to mess around too much with multiple up-downvotes.

Well, you are a favorite of a whale and should earn well from now. Most posts  are still slipping through the cracks where no whales are swimming. This makes Steemit still an unfair community which does not value the quality of the input - only the contribution of the inner circle.

Very good article. Helps to explain the method behind the madness if you will. This shows they pay way more attention to this site and its users than you think. These type of choices only show they are helping content they feel has a meaning.

I've come to view whales as a potential art parton of old.  Back when rich people paid artist to create.  Why can't that work here?

And then those that receive money from whales can then spread out their money to others.

Whales are mysterious creatures)

This behaviour you described here is very interesting; we have to create good content and be lucky to be found; if I understood you correctly.

"Greed will kill this project" This is an excellent and important words!
However, very disappointing, when constructive and exciting positions are not remunerated and votes. Bots vote only for those who are already popular and rich. And how to get into their lists, I do not know, and if it's possible at all.

I think we all need to change the whole system of remuneration. Start for example can be in order to remove the voting button from the home page. And leave within posts. And so reluctantly, but users will read entire posts.

indeed very cool idea, @pfunk experimented with this kind of technique a few weeks back to various success.
the downside is clear: you need to really pay attention and be careful to upvote/downvite as you see fit..very time-consuming.

I should point out that some of the most successful authors have similar ideas. I've been contacted on steemit.chat a few tines by authors asking me to remove my vote, because they felt they were trending too high and would rather make a modest amount and leave more for others (in one case the author in question had two posts high in trending at the same time).

With all the negativity of curation bots, consolidated SP, etc. lately things like this are inspirational in my opinion.

Not only on the part of @smooth who seems to put in the personalized, extra effort (as some of the other whales) enhancing the 'human' side of curation, but also those content creator themselves that asked to have payouts reduced preferring it to be spread to others. 

Inspiring acts like these need to be on a feed somewhere for the community to see and ideally strive for. Leaving the voting debate aside, it's the sentiment that needs to be shown. I'm not against anyone making money, but I truly appreciate those times people choose the non-monetary gain.

I'm not sure I agree with removing your votes after the fact.  

If you accidentally click on something then that is fine but this kind of deliberate upvoting then removing, then putting them back just doesn't sit right with me.

If it were up to me I would impose some kind of penalty for voters who "change their mind" like this.  

IMO the risk is that the same way that whale votes give more prominence to a post and encourage others to follow it could have a domino affect on the post with others also removing their votes.

From a psychological perspective I think there is something inherently more troubling about giving something then taking it aways (as opposed to not giving it at all).  

Imagine giving someone a gift one day and then taking it back  from them the next.  Just doesn't feel right.


On the one hand it looks mean and on the other it seems quite manipulative.  

Anyway that's my opinion maybe I'm just weird that way.  

Everybody interprets these things things through the prism of their own personality.

"This will also allow them to promote material they like"... somewhere in the past I posted that one mans meat is another mans poison.. so Whales playing God is still just that. In the LONG term interest of Steemit I believe it is imperative that there is a wider distribution of 'power' / 'rewards' otherwise this concept will fizzle and die... or stagnate. Just my opinion.