Steemit Crypto Academy - Week 6 - Homework Post for @sapwood


steemit crypto academy - Steem Blockchain.jpg

Hello awesome people, how is everyone doing, hope everyone is doing great and having a wonderful day ahead. Super excited to be part of this amazing crypto lecture week and to be part of the course. This for me is a great and positive way to add value to the community as well as gaining value as well. I’ve learnt a lot as this courses is awesome for improving our knowledge on topics on blockchain and crypto. We are still on the steem blockchain as this week focuses on Convergent Linear Reward.

What are the economic & social ramifications of self-upvote in Steem Blockchain? Do you gain better curation rewards by upvoting others as compared to self-upvote?

Self upvote has been one of the features on the steem blockchain, which means that authors can decide to only vote on their posts. However, while this is allowed, it is not really healthy especially those with larger steem power. Self upvote isn’t a bad thing on the steem blockchain only when used correctly, however, only self upvotes has a negative implication to the ecosystem. Steem is a blockchain powered social platform for creating and curating contents on the steem blockchain. What this means is that, authors create contents and earn author rewards, while curators curate contents and earn curators rewards.

On steem, anyone can become an author or curator or both, creating a healthy social media environment. One of the downsides of only self upvotes is that is removes the whole idea of social media experience and interaction between authors and curators. Being a curator promotes reading contents which is valuable to the content creators who put in the time and effort to create contents. When curators only self upvote, the rewards are not distributed fairly because content creators don’t get rewarded if their contents don’t receive upvotes. This can be demoralizing to many content creators who put in so much time and effort to create those contents.

Self-voting does not have any edge over curation this is due to the curve algorithm used for the reward system in the steem blockchain. What this means is that it is much better to curate other articles – like we already know, it is possible for a curator to earn more than 100% vote value as curation reward, so you can see that it is even better for curators to focus on curating quality contents on the steem blockchain. For instance a Curator who finds a quality content first and votes on it can earn more than 100% vote value as curation reward also a curator who reads and interacts with author contents can even earn more reward from comments which also adds to the advantage of being a curator rather than only self-voting

What is the difference between isolated judgment?

On steem, there are two type of judgments we see when it comes to curation, isolated judgment and community judgment.
Isolated judgment is basically the judgment done by the single curator by voting a post without the community getting involved. In this type of curation, the quality of the post is only judged by the single curator who votes on the post. The post might receive a large upvote value depending on the steem power of the curator but might not be seen as quality by the community which could lead to low number of upvote count but with a large upvote value.

While community judgment is basically judgment done by both curators and the community in general. In this type of curation, the quality of the post is judged by the community who vote on the post. The good thing about this type is that the post will be of high quality for the community to accept it and vote on it. When a quality post is discovered by a curator and a large number of the community also vote on the post, there is a high chance that the post is of high quality and is worthy of receiving large number of upvotes.

The good thing is that isolated judgment can become community judgment if the post is of high quality. The curator who discovers the post and makes the post visible to other curators and the community has the chance of earning more curation reward.

How do you adapt to community judgment on quality content in Steem Blockchain? - Does that bring economic incentive for you?

As a steem user, sometimes not having enough steem power could be a bottle neck when it comes to curation and only curators with steem power can undertake the task of curation to give better reward and also receive better curation reward as well. To adapt to community judgment on quality contents on steem blockchain, all that is needed is to look out for authors with a track record of producing quality contents and also a track record of receiving good community judgment on their contents by receiving large number of upvotes and keep a close eye on those authors and contents, and vote on the contents as well because if a large number of the community sees a post as quality, there is a very big chance that the post is truly quality.
Voting on contents that receive large number of upvotes by the community is rewarding because there is a high chance that other curators in the community will visit the post and vote on it as well. Depending on the time and when the post is voted, it is very possible to earn more as curation reward than the vote value.

Go to Steemworld.org, check your Upvote value( at the current SP, VP). Take a screenshot. Then go to the Steemit trending page, find a post with a payout of more than $10 but less than $50(Age less than 6 Days 12 hrs). Upvote it. Take screenshots before and after upvote. Similarly, go to another post on the Trending page, find a post with a payout of more than $100( Age less than 6 Days 12 Hrs). Upvote it. Take screenshots before and after upvote. Tell the differences between the two. Which one has produced a greater Upvote value & Curation reward for you with the same resources(SP, VP)?

Screenshot (2535).png
Based on the data from Steemworld, my account has an upvote amount of $0.00

A post with a payout of more than $10 but less than $50(Age less than 6 Days 12 hrs)

Before Upvote
Screenshot (2533001).png

After Upvote
Screenshot (2534002).png

A post with a payout of more than $100( Age less than 6 Days 12 Hrs)

Before Upvote
Screenshot (2537003).png

After Upvote
Screenshot (2538004).png

Tell the differences between the two. Which one has produced a greater Upvote value & Curation reward for you

Screenshot (2541001).png

Screenshot (2540001).png

Looking at the two screenshots, you can clearly see that i got more curation reward voting on a post with a payout of more than $10 but less than $50 and Age less than 6 Days 12 hrs than the post with a payout of more than $100 and Age less than 6 Days 12 Hrs.

Cc:
@steemcurator01
@steemcurator02
@steemitblog
@sapwood


Comments 1


Thank you for attending the lecture in Steemit-Crypto-Academy & doing the homework task-6.

What are the economic & social ramifications of self-upvote in Steem Blockchain? Do you gain better curation rewards by upvoting others as compared to self-upvote?

Self upvote has been one of the features on the steem blockchain, which means that authors can decide to only vote on their posts. However, while this is allowed, it is not really healthy especially those with larger steem power. Self upvote isn’t a bad thing on the steem blockchain only when used correctly, however, only self upvotes has a negative implication to the ecosystem. Steem is a blockchain powered social platform for creating and curating contents on the steem blockchain. What this means is that, authors create contents and earn author rewards, while curators curate contents and earn curators rewards.

There are two aspects for a curator- Social and Economical

Social aspects must bring that social intersection when a curator curates a post and social behavior is empowered by PoB. It empowers you to distribute the reward from the reward pool. If you self-upvote you distribute that to yourself, not to an author. In a post-payout author/curator co-exist. Self-upvote diminishes that idea.

Economic aspects are guided by convergent linear reward.

If a user A self-upvotes- He gets diminishing rewards.
If user B self-upvotes- He gets diminishing rewards.
If user C self-upvotes- He gets diminishing rewards.

If users A, B, C curate others and upvote quality content, most of the time they intersect and overlap with each other, and that will lead to community judgment.

If user A, B, and C vote a common post(Quality content) then due to convergent linear reward the upvote value of (A+B+C) will be more than the sum of individual upvote value of A, B and C. Hence the return for the individual curators will also be more.

The good thing is that isolated judgment can become community judgment if the post is of high quality.

That's correct. It is the "quality" that transforms an isolated judgment into community judgment.

A post with a payout of more than $10 but less than $50(Age less than 6 Days 12 hrs)
Before Upvote

image.png

![image.png](

The screenshots you have provided does not indicate the same post, albeit the author is same.

In general, when you go on voting high payout posts in increasing order (say $10, $50, $100, $200, and even more), the upvote value also increases as compared to your isolated upvote value(refer to your upvote value in Steemworld.org). Thanks to convergent linear reward.

Since your upvote value is more you also stand to gain more curation reward. The position of your voting might affect(as you will vote such posts mostly after a whale's vote), but you still gain better curation reward as compared to isolated voting.

That is the reason why the high trending posts further get follow-through voting. Curators are motivated by the convergent linear to vote such posts.

Thank you.


Homework Task -6 successfully accomplished.
[6]

19.03.2021 04:35
0