Viewing a response to: @acidyo/an-update-and-some-words-on-ocd-ocdb-activities
Actually I do not agree with your project, if the idea behind HF21 (well it depends on who you talk to to start even thinking what the idea behind it was) but one of the main ideas was to increase manual curation, unfortunately OCDB does nothing like that what we have is a few people deciding where a large amount of delegated SP should go, I believe this should be each SP owners choice. I am against downvoting but if you individually believe something should be downvoted again that is your decision go for it, but don't take a whole trail along for the down vote let each decide what he likes or not. As for reward values this is a very touchy space just two or three days ago I posted an article with some original photos of a lot of birds quite nice I think, someone else posted a bunch of photos of a lot of rocks also nice, my birds got about 0.40 the rocks about $35.00, let's face it both were shit posts they should have earned about the same maybe $0.40 was about right, yet one of them was upvoted by some of you big guys (I am not really sure if you or OCDB upvoted those rocks). Is this where you get the idea that things are getting better?
author | gduran |
---|---|
permlink | q10ut0 |
category | ocd |
json_metadata | {"app":"steemit/0.1"} |
created | 2019-11-15 17:48:42 |
last_update | 2019-11-15 17:48:42 |
depth | 1 |
children | 2 |
last_payout | 2019-11-22 17:48:42 |
cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
total_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
curator_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
pending_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
promoted | 0.000 HBD |
body_length | 1,157 |
author_reputation | 59,303,906,609,934 |
root_title | "An update and some words on OCD+OCDB activities" |
beneficiaries | [] |
max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
percent_hbd | 10,000 |
post_id | 92,530,576 |
net_rshares | 0 |
If you don't like downvoters trailing other downvoters you should also not like upvoters trailing other upvoters, in both cases nothing you can do about it. The amount of votes never mattered, the strength did. Yup, shitposts and their rewards are subjective and can fluctuate quite a lot.
author | acidyo |
---|---|
permlink | q10v52 |
category | ocd |
json_metadata | {"app":"steemit/0.1"} |
created | 2019-11-15 17:55:51 |
last_update | 2019-11-15 17:55:51 |
depth | 2 |
children | 1 |
last_payout | 2019-11-22 17:55:51 |
cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
total_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
curator_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
pending_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
promoted | 0.000 HBD |
body_length | 290 |
author_reputation | 3,386,930,310,297,481 |
root_title | "An update and some words on OCD+OCDB activities" |
beneficiaries | [] |
max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
percent_hbd | 10,000 |
post_id | 92,530,763 |
net_rshares | 0 |
I don't like either one, curation should be manual and based on merit or let's just cut the hypocrisy about voting for quality posts which are mighty few on Steemit, by the way most of the trending posts are low quality put there by autovotes and are not downvoted, doesn't sound like something that is working OK.
author | gduran |
---|---|
permlink | q10zih |
category | ocd |
json_metadata | {"app":"steemit/0.1"} |
created | 2019-11-15 19:30:24 |
last_update | 2019-11-15 19:30:24 |
depth | 3 |
children | 0 |
last_payout | 2019-11-22 19:30:24 |
cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
total_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
curator_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
pending_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
promoted | 0.000 HBD |
body_length | 314 |
author_reputation | 59,303,906,609,934 |
root_title | "An update and some words on OCD+OCDB activities" |
beneficiaries | [] |
max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
percent_hbd | 10,000 |
post_id | 92,532,777 |
net_rshares | 67,136,574,983 |
author_curate_reward | "" |
voter | weight | wgt% | rshares | pct | time |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
freebornangel | 0 | 67,136,574,983 | 54% |