course reference image
-I thank professor @sapwood for this incredible lecture that he has given us, as a last assignment here I share with you what I could understand from this class.
(1) 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? (Include real examples)
-According to my understanding, I can say that the economic and social ramifications are the quadratic / superlinear equation, the linear equation and the linear convergent equation, it is about the different types of rewards according to the SP/VP of a user. Evidently at the beginning of Steemit, the value of the self-vote was higher in comparison to the vote given to another publication, which disappointed a lot of new users, because it was very difficult for them to grow within the platform, only those who were at the top grew.
-Thanks to the change they made in 2019, that behavior changed, so that now users earn more rewards when they decide to vote for other users' posts. And that is the purpose of Steemit, to publish valuable content and value with positive votes the good work of other users, is the way the blockchain platform is growing every day.
-(2) What is the difference between isolated judgment and community judgment in curation? How do you adapt to community judgment on quality content in Steem Blockchain? Does that bring economic incentive for you? If yes, explain with real examples, (include screenshots and compare them with your isolated judgment)?
-The difference is that the isolated judgment, as its name indicates, is the determinant decision made by an individual user to vote for a random publication, and individually, it is something that generates a lower reward, whereas with the community judgment in the curatorship, better rewards are received when the curators agree, and decide to vote for the same publication, and when they reach an agreement with the community, they achieve a better reward for all voters, which is what is called the convergent linear reward curve.
-The way in which the community's judgment is adapted, is in a real search for quality content, which is what generates value to the Steemblockchain platform, curating quality content, where everyone wins through the convergent linear reward and this makes this content stay at the top of the top and in turn becomes well voted and valued content by the community. Therefore, it generates an economic incentive, because a publication voted by a whale is synonymous with a higher reward for the curators, if they vote it at the right time.
-In my case, I still do not have enough voting power and my SP is very low is 30, that is, I still do not have a positive value in my vote for the other publications, but I can benefit in a small way, by voting content with high valuation by the curators with higher SP. Here is my example of the vote, before and after.
-Before voting, subsequent payment = $ 307.26
After voting, subsequent payment was = $ 307.66
Difference = $ 307.26- $ 307.66 = $ 0.40
=> P selva1 = (1/2) (√307,66) (√307,26-√307,66) = $ 0.10
-(3) 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)? Explain?
Payment of less than $10 before voting
Lower payment $10 after voting
Payment greater than $100 before voting
Payment greater than $100 after voting
-I could see that in the vote of the publication less than 10$, the amount or percentage of points went down when I gave it a vote, but in the publication of vote greater than 100$, the score went up when I gave it a vote, because it is a publication valued by the high curators.
-That means, that if we vote publications that only have higher valuation, to obtain the reward, we will be leaving aside, the publications with low score, I have seen many publications that stay in 0.00$ and nobody votes them because they do not have a good reference score, but they are publications with good content.
**The separators are of my authorship