I think you have no idea what he is doing with his stake...
And if a whale doesn't want to vote manually they can always use a voting trail and follow a good community curation account with x%
But having a vote buying account like upvu will hurt blurt a lot more. Just take a look at trending and you will see a lot korean copy/paste posts upvoted to trending by upvu. If thats your vision of blurt then we can bury it and hop over to steem
RE: Delegation Removal ~ Community Voting
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Delegation Removal ~ Community Voting
Danke dir!
Zwei kleine Belege:
Meine letzten 300 Votes, 11,3% Selbstvotes
Meine letzten 100.000 Votes, 21,4% Selbstvotes
Bedeutet: Im schlechtesten Fall gebe ich 4/5 an die Community.
(Bei hohem Invest-Risiko für die Anlage meiner eigentlichen Altersversorgung)
Ich denke, wenn das alle machen würden, ginge es Blurt sehr gut! ;-)
Danke noch mal!
Thank you for the patronising response.
It's an immutable blockchain. Where everything is seen. So perhaps you are blinded by what you want to see and also have no idea what he is doing with his stake...
What I see is that he self-upvotes 100% of his posts. Which is anti-social. And therefore extremely hypocritical.
I know the damage that Upvu can do. I'm on Steemit and see what's it's done and would have absolutely no problem seeing bidbots banned. But... the important parts of my reply (which you've chosen to totally ignore - perhaps I will patronise you by suggesting that you review your own blinkered bias when replying) are the good that a delegation can do and shouldn't be removed in a knee jerk reaction because the person who's proposed its self-upvotes are decreasing in value with each delegation that UpVu receives.
Steemit is in the process of removing posts that have been upvoted by bots from the trending page. That solves your problem of the trending page looking bad.
Perhaps if you took a bit of time to digest what's being said rather than what you want it to say, you'll stop encouraging people to sell their investment and actually help Blurt to grow.
@double-u makes normaly 1 or 2 Post a week and if he self votes the 1 or 2 Post a week it is not bad . If he would make every day 4 Post and votes them with 100% that would be not good 4 sure .
@double-u says himself that self-voting is anti-social so why differentiate between 1 self-upvote and 10 self-upvotes? It's hypocritical.
I'm interested at what point you think @double-u's self-upvoting would not be good? I'm also interested in @double-u's opinion on this, especially having supported your comment (which implies agreement with your point).
1 post per week
2 posts per week
3 posts per week
4 posts per week
5 posts per week
6 posts per week
1 post per day
2 posts per day
3 posts per day
4 posts per day
5 posts per day
6 posts per day
7 posts per day
etc.
Why should I argue with you when you don't even read my comment properly. There you will already find my answer to your question.
This is an important point of discussion and if you don't want to get involved in it, you shouldn't have chosen to reply.
I apologise for over complicating the question and including options that you had already eliminated. I will simplify the question for you...
At what point you think @double-u's self-upvoting would not be good? I'm also interested in @double-u's opinion on this, especially having supported your comment (which implies agreement with your point and having also recently asked the question himself).
3 posts per week
4 posts per week
5 posts per week
6 posts per week
1 post per day
2 posts per day
3 posts per day
You will notice the significant difference between the options.
It's important so that users know at what point @double-u will start a campaign to stop them from doing what they are currently doing. Am I safe at self-upvoting 3 posts per day as your initial answer suggests? Or should I stop before that point?
I eagerly await your response now that I've taken the time to be far more pedantic in my reply which I apologise for not realising was a basic requirement in communicating with you.
If someone with doulble-u power would daily make 3 or 4 Post and would vote each of them with 100% that would not be good .
On the Other hand he makes every week his Pub a very important event here on Blurt .
Their People can make advertisment 4 post they think that they are important .
Chat with each other and a big part of these people that comment get a vote form Double-u . Werner votes Sunday,Monday and sometimes even on Tuesday people in the Pub .
So please do not pretend that he is only enriching himself with his votes
Let's talk about me instead then. I've bought myself 50,000 Blurt with my own hard earned money. I want to self-upvote but don't know what's considered acceptable. 3 to 4 posts per day is considered too much so is 2 posts per day is ok? Or am I allowed more because I'm not very powerful?
Do you think double-u did not worked hard 4 his blurt ?
The same rules apply to everyone. So if you would now make 4 posts a day and vote them all with 100% yourself I would not find that ok.
Even less ok I would find it if these were your only votes that you would make daily.
Unsocial are the people who constantly have to dictate what you can do and what not, or constantly spread bad vibes! @double-u makes more for the community than a large part of the people here who only whine and cry about a few % Selfvotes. Thought we are beyond the point that selfvotes do not give a damn if the community is not completely ignored. But it seems that the same monkeys from Steem and Hive always come over when the course of Blurt looks good.
Be glad that @double-u votes here on Blurt in the Communty and believes in the community (still).
He could also say "fuck you friends, I'm going home!" and he sells his blurt at the current price. With the total proceeds, he could make a daily return of over $800 through Osmosis Pools.
If it's all about the money, blurt is not the best place to go!
Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
PS:
And this from one who delegates his complete BP to voting services over and over again. That explains everything.
´´´
the-gorilla delegate 5,001.085 BP to tomoyan 2021/12/05 14:02:3314,665,338 | 9f81f06
the-gorilla undelegate to tomoyan 2021/12/05 13:14:4814,664,392 | b22a0d9
the-gorilla undelegate to upvu 2021/12/05 13:14:3614,664,388 | 504ac0c
the-gorilla delegate 40,041.597 BP to upvu 2021/11/23 22:21:0914,332,915 | 5cf5c2e
the-gorilla undelegate to upvu 2021/11/18 20:13:2714,187,998 | 9dd4d93
the-gorilla delegate 5,008.424 BP to tomoyan 2021/11/14 19:38:2714,073,556 | 81509d5
the-gorilla undelegate to tomoyan 2021/11/14 19:36:2714,073,516 | 9b0e32a
the-gorilla delegate 15,025.275 BP to upvu 2021/11/14 19:36:0014,073,507 | 4721046
the-gorilla delegate 5,008.425 BP to tomoyan 2021/11/14 19:35:3914,073,500 | 69958af
the-gorilla delegate 10,020.491 BP to tomoyan 2021/11/09 16:08:2113,927,455 | ad043c5
the-gorilla delegate 10,020.491 BP to upvu 2021/11/09 16:07:5113,927,445 | bc756dd
´´´
Yes! We finally have a winner!!!
I complained about UpVu when I first joined and put my investment on hold as a result. Then I delegate all of my Blurt to UpVu.
Am I being ironic, or just another hypocrite?
As everybody else has told me, it's my Blurt, and I can do what I want with it.
Oh hang on, no I can't.
You're not done making your point?
source
Or perhaps you feign dislike for upvu?
I had thought the compromise reached had grandfathered you in, but maybe it stops you from giving more and you wish to find a workaround.
Either way, I stand by my supporting your right to use the service as it's your stake, an unpopular opinion I've advocated for weeks now as this topic has simmered.
And having taken the time to look at Steemit and the profile I've been using there for 8 months, please also take the time to look at the delegations, the accounts I support, the charities I support, the users who needed financial help that I sourced and provided for them (even to the point that I'm a Godfather to a beautiful girl in the Philippines), the competitions I run for the community via that profile and @fpl-gorilla (including the Steem that I give away on a weekly basis) and the repeated comments regarding my disapproval for voting services and self-voting in general. Put the kettle on and make yourself a cuppa, there's plenty there.
That was my vision for my time on Blurt.
So, my subsequent arrival on Blurt. An initial investment of 50,000 and some commitment of time. Full of hope that I could make a difference. Help to make it something that we can all be proud of by helping to fight against plagiarism, writing a nice, shiny new front-end that will make it stand out from its rivals instead of the same, generic looking reskin of Steemit and Hive.
So I join the community, take a look around at the content I'm interested in and think "oh, it's all plagiarised". I highlight a couple of plagiarised users but hang on, nothing's done about it. Nothing can be done about it. So there goes the fight against plagiarism. Fairly quickly, I reach the same mindset that took me 4 months to realise about Steemit - what's the point in highlighting something when there's no consequence? So I change my approach and decide to withdraw my commitment to dedicate time to Blurt. And decide to place the remainder of my investment elsewhere until things get better. At this point, my mindset changes and Blurt becomes more of an investment than anything else, which I want to maximise my returns from. Feel free to also review my timeline of activity here - you'll notice the comments, followed by the timing of my delegation to UpVu.
Delegating my Blurt to UpVu is a selfish act, which will only benefit me and UpVu. But when I look around and see almost every other user self-voting (including those that have been voted in as witnesses), when self-voting only benefits those that vote for themselves then I am no more selfish than them. I'll be sure to vote on a load of other stuff too, then my percentage of self-voting will be 0% and I can claim to be community conscious.
I have become a product of the society that Blurt has created. I have become selfish and self-serving which as you say, is my right to do so. When I first spoke to you and you shared your "freedom" speech, I took the time to read all of your deleted posts on Steemit from 4 years ago from your original account. At some point, you changed too. Actions of others change how we perceive the world around us. In this case, how I perceive and interact with the world of Blurt.
Yes, I will be delegating my entire Blurt holding to UpVu later today. This won't affect the quality of content that I choose to post. This won't make me start posting plagiarised content. And I am well aware that I am a hypocrite for doing so. On Steemit, I'll continue the activities that I had intended to do here, I'll continue my time commitment there and continue not to use voting services.
Yes. Now, I am 100% done 👋
I've just realised my explanation was totally unnecessary, but I'll leave it here anyway 🤷♀️
Thank you for the long explanation. While it was
It was a sign of respect just the same that you made the gesture to me. I'm humbled and thankful for your consideration in making it.
I've been putting off making a post on all of this, as many of the positions taken in the broader scheme of ownership have me upset a little. I appreciate your views, and am hopeful that you can grow to appreciate Blurt and not succumb to the very thing you felt strongly against. I'm doing a poor job right now at verbalizing because I understand your frustrations despite mine not being aligned or centered exactly with yours. However there is some small bit of overlap.
Of course, you're free to do as you wish. But Blurt is in need of leadership, and perhaps with time you might grow to being just such a thing in the area of concern you voiced. I don't expect an answer, but wanted to return your gesture to honor the one you had with me.
I'll be making a post in the coming days as I work to separate my emotions from the pictures I'll be describing, which will still probably make some cliques angry no matter how it is painted. I'm hopeful that when I make it, you might bring yourself to read it and weigh in, even if to tell me you disagree with my views on everything.
I also wanted to let you know that I took the time to find your account there because of our initial engagement. I laugh even now at how dismissive you were over the parts of my exchange that weren't of importance to your point. Laugh in a good way that is. While we disagreed on the responsibility of the issue I respected how strongly you felt/feel about the issue I agree is a real one.
In this very thread I saw you raise points, some that I see that were left on the table unacknowledged as I believe I'm possibly the only one who saw them.
A lot of words I'm saying that can be summed up with while we may disagree somewhat, I have a lot for respect for you overall which is why I took the time to look and also why I hold out hope you will slowly come to value Blurt and become a leader here.
If not us, then who?
In addition, your reply also highlights an additional bias that this "survey" will inherently attract.
When I first replied, I was the 1st to disagree with the banning of delegations. I had the balls to say something others believed but were too frightened to say through fear of people like you attacking them. A bit like the voting system in many autocratic countries.
If this is how the decision to end delegation is made, it's wrong. The process is wrong. And therefore the outcome will be wrong.