TOP 80 effective Steemit сurators that encourage discussion for the 2017.11.06

I want to share with you statistics about the most effective Steemit curators.

This statistic is not about how much the authors or curators have earned. This statistics shows the list of curators, whose contribution to the reward pool distribution is the most significant.

image source

---

What does this mean?

You can say that there is nothing interesting in this statistics. That it is clear that the reward pool is distributed by whales. But!

The most interesting thing is how the curator distributes the reward pool. He can vote only for his posts and his comments. He can vote for a selected circle of authors and affiliated accounts. But also he can vote for a large number of authors who publish interesting content.

Thus, an effective curator is a curator who has sufficient Steem Power (he can be an investor or a popular author who has earned his Steem Power by publishing interesting content), devoting time and effort to the content curating at Steemit and distributing a reward pool in favor of the authors. And the efficiency level is estimated by how much SBD curator distributes among as many authors as possible.

But this time we will review those curators who reward the discussions, that is, they vote for the comments of other users.

According to the ideology of the Steemit creators, the discussion is as valuable an element as the author's content. Confirmation of this is the allocation of a separate pool of awards for comments.

---

How it works?

Votes - Each curator distributes a certain part of the reward pool with his votes (upvote / flag).

Authors - This part of the pool he distributes between a certain number of authors.

VAS (vote average strength) - For general awareness, we can estimate the average vote strength in percents (%), with which the curator votes.

Contr. (SBD) (Contribution in SBD) - The distributed part of the pool is the contribution of the curator, it is calculated in SBD. In this case, the author's reward is taken into account. The curator's reward is not taken into account.

Share % - The percentage of the of the curator contribution among the contributions of all curators, we can also estimate for information purposes in %.

Eff. - The effectiveness of the curator is estimated in conventional units and is calculated as follows.

The total number of authors who published rewarded comments for the period under study is determined.
Then the contribution of the curator is divided by the total number of authors, and then multiplied by the number of authors for whom the curator voted for the period.

Thus, we see that, having distributed even a smaller number of SBD between a larger number of authors, the curator can be more effective than other curators. At the same time, having a greater voice power, but not actively voting, supporting a small number of authors, the curator takes a lower position in the rating.

And now, statistics.

---

3423 authors published their rewarded comments during this day.

3763 accounts participated in the comments curating according to information from the database.

18542 votes were made during this day.

1805,82 SBD - is the total author rewards for this day.

---

Given the number of curators supporting the comments and influencing their reward, I decided to reduce the number of curators in this toplist.

TOP-80 effective curators for November 06, 2017 (24 Hours period)

№	Account	Votes	Authors	VAS(%)	Contr. (SBD)	Share %	Eff.
1	@good-karma	141	118	0	29,61	1,64	1,02
2	@surpassinggoogle	77	54	2	51,39	2,85	0,81
3	@acidyo	59	46	2	59,09	3,27	0,79
4	@stellabelle	36	31	56	75,71	4,19	0,69
5	@pharesim	98	79	0	21,56	1,19	0,5
6	@gentlebot	47	44	100	32,44	1,8	0,42
7	@thing-2	47	44	100	32,46	1,8	0,42
8	@greenman	47	28	18	49,77	2,76	0,41
9	@hebrew	47	27	18	19,92	1,1	0,16
10	@awgbibb	53	51	9	9,79	0,54	0,15
11	@solisrex	12	7	100	53,27	2,95	0,11
12	@jaki01	26	23	12	15,66	0,87	0,11
13	@steevc	75	55	22	5,7	0,32	0,09
14	@cnts	77	40	9	7,87	0,44	0,09
15	@mattclarke	46	29	41	7,7	0,43	0,07
16	@ats-david	15	14	3	14,06	0,78	0,06
17	@megaspore	12	10	100	17,54	0,97	0,05
18	@bitcoiner	139	116	1	1,39	0,08	0,05
19	@ulfr	24	17	35	9,61	0,53	0,05
20	@thedamus	49	31	32	5,11	0,28	0,05
21	@tytran	13	13	69	12,11	0,67	0,05
22	@esteemapp	140	116	1	1,4	0,08	0,05
23	@marketreport	18	12	100	10,18	0,56	0,04
24	@kafkanarchy84	21	20	18	4,86	0,27	0,03
25	@alexbeyman	20	19	22	4,81	0,27	0,03
26	@lichtblick	59	44	2	2,04	0,11	0,03
27	@czechglobalhosts	20	19	3	6,08	0,34	0,03
28	@reddust	35	30	11	2,9	0,16	0,03
29	@eturnerx	26	22	20	4,95	0,27	0,03
30	@demotruk	14	12	59	9,72	0,54	0,03
31	@lyndsaybowes	29	19	7	5,24	0,29	0,03
32	@xpilar	25	12	7	4,86	0,27	0,02
33	@rebeccaryan	16	16	25	4,03	0,22	0,02
34	@ghasemkiani	60	31	1	1,8	0,1	0,02
35	@davebrewer	29	13	80	4,03	0,22	0,02
36	@adm	137	1	2	80,26	4,44	0,02
37	@trafalgar	15	11	1	7,22	0,4	0,02
38	@margaretwise	55	34	8	1,55	0,09	0,02
39	@double-u	22	10	34	5,95	0,33	0,02
40	@eric-boucher	33	9	43	7,59	0,42	0,02
41	@crypt0	12	10	29	7,9	0,44	0,02
42	@exyle	18	17	3	4,32	0,24	0,02
43	@htooms	31	29	14	2,48	0,14	0,02
44	@leemikyung	10	10	5	2,1	0,12	0,01
45	@meesterboom	45	26	1	1,07	0,06	0,01
46	@creatr	47	26	3	1,15	0,06	0,01
47	@nextgencrypto	7	1	31	22,09	1,22	0,01
48	@jwolf	5	4	25	5,32	0,29	0,01
49	@floridasnail	11	8	31	4,95	0,27	0,01
50	@hooshang	13	2	100	9,25	0,51	0,01
51	@lordoftruth	25	18	2	1,81	0,1	0,01
52	@ioc	2	1	100	23,67	1,31	0,01
53	@jyp	5	4	100	4,75	0,26	0,01
54	@sebastianjago	8	4	66	6,18	0,34	0,01
55	@mrosenquist	11	8	39	3,31	0,18	0,01
56	@swissclive	5	4	83	7,81	0,43	0,01
57	@surfermarly	10	9	39	3,8	0,21	0,01
58	@dragosroua	24	17	12	1,38	0,08	0,01
59	@arturomdg	8	1	100	24,04	1,33	0,01
60	@cryptographic	8	3	45	6,06	0,34	0,01
61	@arthuradamson	16	12	11	1,53	0,08	0,01
62	@justtryme90	30	25	1	1,64	0,09	0,01
63	@everittdmickey	35	20	10	2,56	0,14	0,01
64	@mammasitta	28	25	5	1,57	0,09	0,01
65	@inventor16	5	5	22	5,48	0,3	0,01
66	@seablue	10	9	73	2,08	0,12	0,01
67	@whatsup	32	22	3	0,94	0,05	0,01
68	@davidorcamuriel	8	3	72	16,68	0,92	0,01
69	@purepinay	15	13	24	1,62	0,09	0,01
70	@cornholio	10	4	100	10,42	0,58	0,01
71	@whalecurry	10	3	100	7,8	0,43	0,01
72	@sift666	16	13	25	1,59	0,09	0,01
73	@janusface	6	6	80	4,74	0,26	0,01
74	@opheliafu	6	6	100	3,43	0,19	0,01
75	@paolobeneforti	16	14	22	1,85	0,1	0,01
76	@clayop	2	2	30	8,86	0,49	0,01
77	@raybrockman	23	20	3	1,28	0,07	0,01
78	@engagement	7	1	31	22,56	1,25	0,01
79	@uwelang	24	18	6	1,78	0,1	0,01
80	@destinysaid	13	12	29	2,23	0,12	0,01
81	@warofcraft	16	16	12	1,45	0,08	0,01
82	@reggaemuffin	6	6	8	7	0,39	0,01
83	@jaytop	19	13	9	1,78	0,1	0,01
84	@ace108	14	11	10	4,03	0,22	0,01
85	@libertyteeth	5	4	28	5,08	0,28	0,01
86	@overkillcoin	33	19	13	2,3	0,13	0,01
87	@deanliu	6	4	37	8,52	0,47	0,01
88	@jaynie	21	15	34	1,41	0,08	0,01
89	@superstar2018	49	35	1	0,69	0,04	0,01
90	@kus-knee	17	17	3	1,59	0,09	0,01
91	@honourmaus	83	69	6	0,72	0,04	0,01
92	@majes.tytyty	21	6	23	5,69	0,32	0,01
93	@slowwalker	1	1	100	23,53	1,3	0,01
94	@denmarkguy	22	14	33	2,88	0,16	0,01
95	@feruz	139	116	1	0,24	0,01	0,01
96	@goldmatters	5	4	100	8,77	0,49	0,01
97	@ramta	2	1	100	30,04	1,66	0,01
98	@dwinblood	16	12	10	2,72	0,15	0,01
99	@yoganarchista	18	18	23	1,22	0,07	0,01
100	@daveks	12	10	18	3,24	0,18	0,01

---

Now you know all these heroes. Their daily work increases the interest in the discussion, gives hope to some authors, and some even a decent income. Their work attracts new authors in Steemit and makes existing users remain.

---

Information sources

All information is prepared by querying data from a SteemSQL - SQL database containing information from Steem's blockchain, as well as by calculations based on this data.

Special thanks to @arcange for SteemSQL and for the advice provided to me during the development of this project.