Why are so many “power account” payouts down? And why so drastically?
This was just brought to my attention by a friend, and I had noticed it myself as well, but didn’t realize how widespread it was.
Is voting power becoming more decentralized? Are bots taking over? Is this the result of waning interest? Voting/curation trails, groups, and initiatives? I really don’t know.
My account, and those of my friends here in Niigata like @boxcarblue have suffered as well. But it’s not just me and other Niigata Steemians. Take a look at many bloggers on here who were consistently kicking ass in a solid way until just recently. Bloggers like @ramengirl and @papa-pepper. Even extremely well known accounts like @corbettreport. Payouts to high-level, high-quality bloggers like this have been sliced to a fraction of their previously consistent levels.
Can anyone shed some light on what is going on here?
This is not a complaint. I just am curious to know what’s happening. Any theories?
~KafkA
Graham Smith is a Voluntaryist activist, creator, and peaceful parent residing in Niigata City, Japan. Graham runs the "Voluntary Japan" online initiative with a presence here on Steem, as well as DLive and Twitter. (Hit me up so I can stop talking about myself in the third person!)
I noticed this a while ago. After thinking on it overnight (saw the post linked in #price yesterday) here's what I think.
I'll edit the comment if I think of a few more.
This is a great answer, and I tend to agree with nearly all of the points you have raised here. I have lost some benefactors as well. The only point where I disagree is the "turns out some blogs were not made of gold" part. Whether or not they were "made of gold" is entirely subjective, and as you yourself pointed out, and is not necessarily correlated with post payout values.
The stuff about minnow obsession/Communistic ways of thinking- YES.
As well as the OGs leaving.
Anyway, This is probably the best answer address of the issue I have seen so far, so thanks!
I'm gonna head over and vote for your witness now.
EDIT: You should make as full post out of this comment, in my humble opinion. It's pretty dead on.
Thank you for the witness approval, I really appreciate it. I don't know if it's worth making a full post about. No one will read it and you (and probably @schattenjaeger) already read the comment, so its gone as far as it can go.
So it's not because Steem value is down? Hmmm interesting. 🤔
Posted using Partiko Android
A big reason no doubt is that the pool is being raped by the vote bots rewarding horseshit.
But also, I think some of the vote trail services are down.
Probably a lot of reasons.
Doesn’t stop certain annoying pricks and prickettes from raking in the dough, though.
But yeah, my payouts have made me wonder why I’m even here.
Add to this delegating to bots/minnowbooster which has a much higher ROI than curation.
And trails down makes a big difference of course. But that’s very much on/off tho. They work for one, not for the other.
But hey, as long as the bots keep returning less (max ROI 10% is creeping in), soon their customers will be revolting as their returns diminish ever further. Delegators will still be running a profit but the bidbots users will eventually ditch the practice.
The mega SP powered by bidbots obviously has a massive impact on the rewards distribution of the pool as well. This analysis has some interesting data about it: https://steemit.com/@paulag/steemits-bidbot-business-income-analysis-april-18
I have a feeling that much more SP is active now than some months ago, not just the delegations made by Steemit. That also influences the distribution of the otherwise rather static pool.
This is a great point. Hadn’t thought of it in this way.
Same man. Hard to justify putting in hours upon hours for full-time content creation, live shows, giveaways, long-form posts, etc, when it seems no longer correlated to reward level, when bills gotta be paid. Beyond the actual payout, yeah, the massive bot abuse is insulting after pouring tons of effort into a post and seeing it ignored.
Not giving up here, but damn.
I’ll still write my diatribes on whatever social media site, cash or not, but the whole point of this platform is to incentivize that. Was doing pretty damn good for a second there. Time to watch, adapt, and execute in a new way, maybe?
Thanks for your answer. Seems to me to pretty much cover a lot of the main bases.
Yeah, but it has a lot to do with the GUI, as well. Content discovery is hard here. If your post doesn't get a whale vote within the first 30 or so minutes, it's going to get buried. And it seems to happen no matter how many millions of followers you have.
For example, I wouldn't expect massive payouts for my Mega Man posts, seeing as how they're so niche, but it'd be nice to know that they at least reach all the people interested in them. No matter their SP or vote worth.
Something like "suggestions" like on YouTube would be good potentially. If I'm reading a post about voluntaryism, the site could suggest "similar posts" to me on the side, or something.
We could even have a "suggestions" feed, along with our own home feed, that runs on algorithms based on the type of content we consume.
I know algorithms are a dirty word in social media today for people like you and me, but when done properly, they can work. Especially if they're strictly optional.
I use GINAbot to find the content I want like this post. Yes, the platform should make that easy without using the bot, but at least there is an option. The UI needs a lot of work to even be like busy.org let alone a place like fascistbook. We need communities and groups here too, for just using tags (and searching for them using GINAbot) is very limiting.
Not to be a dick, but I need to really point this out.
If we are to compare Apple to apples, and we see that a similar user is making the exact same content as you, and they make about 10c per 1000 views on advertisements and gets about 10,000 views, making only $1 and you make 1 steem rewards, then by that very fact, you've done just as good as the YouTuber just by being here alone.
I don't think your content deserves to make you a living given who the audience is and I'm sure you don't either, so why expect those crazy payouts like before? That was outside of the norm. If youre inside the norm, you should be earning less in rewards, as more users join (with better content than you, and there always will be).
But if all content on this site were making 15 steem units and comparable quality to yours, then at the current rate, you're doing better than YouTube daily bloggers with 100,000 daily views.
I think we're all used to seeing these high payouts that was essentially money growing from a tree. Litterally a free money tree and people down this whole comment line is upset that the money tree is drying.
It's not that their work quality went up. It's just that their low quality, low interest content is no longer earning as much free money as before and it's because of this or that etc.
While I think bidbots have a lot to with what appears on the trending page, there's also the fact that there's tons of shit posting and poor access to whatever good content is out there (nearly everyone below has stated that below).
Can an update to the condenser fix that? Maybe it can fix one of underlying problems with what appears at the front. But more so, maybe people just don't have an incentive to work harder... Because of decentralization.
You make points. You even make points I've made in the past.
But the thing is, it's not apples and apples - it's apples and oranges. Hell, it's more like apples and kayaks.
That's how distant Steemit and sites like YouTube are from each other.
I don't buy it that the payouts are so heavily affected by new users. Not since the vast majority of new users struggle to get a single vote outside of their own self-vote.
If I were to start here today, I'd never make a dime. I'm not even sure it's worth it to join Steemit today.
I sort of agree that right now, given how things are and how small the audience is, no one here "deserves" to "make a living" off of this - if we use a very limited definition of "deserving", and if we compare Steemit to a site like YouTube - like I myself have done in the past.
But since this is not YouTube, this is Steemit, however.
The rewards are going somewhere, and people are expressing frustration over where they are going.
It's subjective, of course, but something being subjective - by its very nature- opens it up to public opinion.
You are correct that steemit and youtube are miles away from each other, but the behavior of people are exactly the same, no matter what platform you are on.
To break it down, in all social media platforms, there are producers and consumers. The consumers have attention to give, and producers want money. Thats how relationship of attention = money was developed. The problem is that there isnt a direct relationship between the two in traditional platforms. In terms of youtube, the equation becomes
attention + advertisers = producers + money.
On the left is the flow in, and the right is the flow out.
On steemit, the intent was
attention+investment (SP)= producers + money
If no one invests in the platform, through locking in SP, then the producers make no money because the upvotes aren't there. But thats not the only way this equation can become unbalanced.
Another way for it to become unbalanced is by removing the attention element. Bidbots remove attention in two ways.
First, the person who invests into the platform no longer gives their attention, allowing producers to make whatever they want. The second way, is that the attention no longer drives the producers to make what the person giving the attention wants to read (that was a mouthful).
The only solution to fixing this is centralization. There will never be a collective force big enough to fix the problem without centralized governing body.
I think this is possible with a large enough SP account that makes the right moves for investors. The pitch would be that if you continue to support bidbots, you'll lose money. Earn less, but earn it for a longer period of time in something thats worth investing in.
It's not that their work quality went up. It's just that their low quality, low interest content is no longer earning as much free money as before and it's because of this or that etc.
This is true for some users, absolutely. I think it's a truth that many steemians don't want to admit. As the platform grows, the quality standard rises dramatically.
I get what your saying, but the phrasing isn't exactly right.
A decentralized app with more and more users will not increase the standard. There is no standard.
The only thing that will happen is the % of users that are willing to produce good content will normalize. As more users join, the % of good content, in theory will remain the same. But higher volume results in higher number of good quality content.
Part of the issue is decentralization. Steemit.com is too decentralized to serve any real purpose. Communities is great and all, but the monetary system here typically brings the wrong types of people.
The reality is that we need a centralized governing body to organize things.
While you made many good points, this considers economics as the only metric of value.
Frankly, that's a ludicrous assumption, and will result in horrifying hegemony, just as it has in the real world.
The real reality is that we need to consider many value streams Steemit provides. If you're only consideration and value you're interested in is financial, communities will provide you a way to focus on that.
I'm greatly looking forward to communities, because I am seeking to minimize mere financial considerations, for far more important values I reckon are becoming existential.
Censorship, and freedom of speech, for example. That's more important than money today. Just ask Tommy Robinson.
The centralization doesn't have to be broad styled like facebook. It can be communities based, which can and does also exist in real life. The issue with the real life versions are how they come to power, keep their power and what they do with the power.
In the steemit world, the total opposite exists. The only hegemon is the SP hegemon that consists mostly of whales. They have it and thus control the rewards to their desire. If you completely destroy the ability to allow hegemons to exist, then you also negate the ability to combat them. But that's not what we are talking about or see here.
What i'm advocating for stronger communities with people willing to put their SP to work, and the best way for that to happen is to have effective community leaders (and delegation).
I agree there is no literal standard, like there's no group of people who set a standard. In my opinion though, the community and "market" of votes acts to set the standard, without any individual needing to consciously do it. The standard is whatever quality people need to reach before they can get an audience.
The centralized governing body thing, that we may have to disagree about for now. Good discussion mate, Cheers
Thats the point I dont agree with ( i mean, I agree with it, but thats not whats going on here). The level of quality needed to reach an audience here has been removed by the ability to collude outside the network. That collusion is not something that can be solved on the blockchain level. Because of that, it needs a centralized way to control behavior of steemians. All bidbots are, are centralized power if you think about it. the difference is that it can be removed just as fast as it was created, thanks to delegations.
Already total BS and lost me.
Who on here is me and where did you not get that I’m not complaining?
You sound silly.
edit: Nope, scratch my comment. I actually was talking to you. If you don't get it, and you think im silly and full of bullshit then that's that. Not attacking you, but making an open discussion.
I don’t think you’re full of bullshit. I agree with a lot of what you said. I just think maybe you assumed too much, man. I don’t think I complained anywhere, and I never said I deserved anything. Nor were the payouts I and others making “crazy” in my view. And if I said to you that what you express here is the “exact same” thing as what others express, I think that would be silly. No two people are the same, and thus, no two blogs.
It's anecdotal as much as anything else.
Amen to that. It makes staying for the community just that little bit harder.
For money honey.
DId you see this video?
Could it explain why?
https://d.tube/v/exyle/bkn0mb1y
Keep in mind that EOS goes live 6/1, and there's a rumor that it will have a competing decentralized social network to compete with Steemit's. It could explain the dropping prices of STEEM and SBD lately too. I'm not sure what is going to happen in the future, but for now I'm still buying when prices get low. If EOS ends up with a better solution, I'll gladly switch. I just don't think it is going to happen that quickly if at all.
Before the good quality authors were set on auto upvote list, so people could earn curation rewards automatically. However, with the rise of vote selling services, people just sell votes and they get better returns then curation.
One possible answer is how more and more users are selling their votes or delegating their SP for money, leaving less value for upvotes for "non-paying users".
That’s an interesting point for sure. Thanks.
This is true. I do it.
By that same account, there's very little here that interest me. Most of the content here is from daily bloggers posting about random feel good thoughts, travel blogs, themselves talking about something they aren't an expert in, food. Etc. All of this content produces little value to the masses and we all know what happens to blogging websites that built themselves on that model....
The only difference steem can make is if people develop more applications that leverage the blockchain to centralize the data that is on it. The steem condenser will otherwise be the equivalent to yahoo message boards, a total complete fucking mess. Except it was the best thing of its time. Steem has a plethora of better alternatives.
It's impossible to get a vote for a non-paying user now. Everyone hoards their VP like their lives depend on it and even if it sits there and rots they won't throw a vote of more than 1% at anyone nonpaying. New users, old users, doesn't matter. God forbid someone who didn't pay gets something.
While that may be statistically accurate, it's not literally true at all. I have never once paid for or sold a vote, and I only manually curate, also never having cast a 1% vote.
Well people are basically greedy. I'm selling some votes, basically on times when I'm not active, so I can't be a hypocrite but I still prefer voting content I like instead of trying to earn as much as possible.
We can't have a perfect system with people, as greed can basically ruin any system available. Steem could be something beautiful, but it's nothing but a vote selling platform for far too many people.
A great question as each time my account has climbed for a few days, it drops way back down. I am in the process of trying to migrate a large organization here away from other social media, but man the payouts are not helping.
I also look at who is voting consistently and they are mostly the same folks. So something is up... but it still beats working for Facebook or Instagram.
Ok... I'm just getting to see this for the first time though... Would make a research on that and get back to you in the comment section if i find anything concerning that
I don't know the reason why. I don't understand it why is steemit going through all these changes.
I've noticed the same, but initially figured it has something to to with the average value of Steem. Some bloggers who regularly saw $30+ posts are down to $4 or $5. No idea what is causing this.
Yeah, it seems really strange. These bloggers you mention, though, many of them were making the same consistent high payouts even when Steem was at 3 bucks previously, if I’m not mistaken.
Yes it would seem so. One of them commented he couldn't wait for EOS to launch even though he recently became a witness here on Steemit. He did not elaborate, so I don't know what he knows or if he is willing to share any insights he may have. Right now Steem seems to be holding it's own amidst another general down turn.
Some people - including me to a degree - are hoping that dan launches a better version of Steemit with EOS, avoiding the pitfalls that ruined this place.
Every decision made after dan left has been terrible.
Not that I really trust dan, either, though.
But even if that goes to shit, at the very least I guess I’ll just self-vote myself to $200 ten times a day with the amount of EOS I hodl, so at least there’s that.
The problem I had with EOS is that they wouldn't sell to U.S. and Chinese entities. While I'm neither of those, I wasn't happy with the explanation they gave concerning not being viable in all 50 U.S. States. This would be a situation unique to EOS; I lived in the U.S. for more than 20 years and have never run into this issue before with any other commodity. Not saying it's not true, just that I have never seen something like that, and that all the brokerage houses would have trouble with that if it were true for any other commodity. Enough reason to not trust the information at face value.
As far as upvoting yourself; there is nothing wrong with following the great example set by youknowwhojin and even his detractors use bots for the same reason. Funny, nobody complains when people emulate Warren Buffet's strategies.
Greetings!
Maybe there is something yet to be revealed in the works relating to communities and SMTs—as well as EOS—affecting all of this...
I suppose time will tell. I didn't come here to be pigeon holed into one group or another though. People have grouped themselves based on interests, geolocation, language, etc., but I prefer to move around a bit or I'll get bored quickly. lol!
EOS is certainly something to watch; it could easily compete with Steem as a platform and if they do things right, I'd hate to think what could happen to Steem.
Greetings!