Delegating Out Your SP and Participating: Is it the Same?
Maybe that's a bit of a cryptic title, but bear with me for a moment.
I have noticed that several people I have followed for a long time — and who have considerable amounts of SteemPower — currently have on the order of 95-99% of their SP delegated out.
Meanwhile, they are still remaining very active in the community, commenting, posting and engaging.
Grass in the sun, at the "golden hour"
The interesting "net effect" is that these folks end up (for example) only being able to leave 0.005 upvotes for their own account while whatever trail, guild or automated service they have handed over the bulk of their voting power to instead has the "effective" 0.50 per upvote voting power.
Just for clarity: I'm not talking about those who delegate out 100SP chunks to dozens or hundreds of "redfish" newcomers to help them deal with resource credit issues while they are getting started... I'm primarily interested in those who might have had 20,092SP and then delegated out 20,000SP to a single (or maybe a couple) of sources, but still are very active community members.
Now, there's no value/strategic judgment here... merely a question: Would you take such an approach because you're trying to help an organization, or is it merely a strategy to (presumably?) maximize curation rewards?
I can totally appreciate wanting to do such a thing if I had no time of my own to be an active community member... no point in letting your daily votes go to waste!
But still being active, I'm not sure I'd entrust an automated service to be a better judge of what content to vote on, than I can be myself, by actually reading and interacting with individual posts. Besides, what sort of impression does it leave (or does that MATTER?) when you are actively encouraging people to engage and upvote to build their accounts, yet your own upvote (after 2-3 years) isn't even at the "dust threshold."
I suppose my reticence here also relates to my old assertions from a year or more ago that bots are not intelligent.
However, this is simply "research," here: I'm curious to see what motivates a strategy of still being active in the community, but having almost no voting power your own.
What do YOU think? Have you tried such an approach? And if so, why, and how did it work for you? What was your intention? Leave a comment-- share your experiences-- be part of the conversation!
(As usual, all text and images by the author, unless otherwise credited. This is original content, created expressly for Steemit)
Created at 190403 09:18 PST
0962
Of almost 90K SP I delegate out around 65K.
30K to community groups for 600 Steem/month yield,
20K to power a bot exclusively for my home city (Adelaide)
The other 15K to various initiatives and dapps and a few smaller delegations to SM players with RC concerns.
Most of what I get back in liquid Steem I power up, spend on SM cards or donate as prize money in my quarterly #poecomp race.
Ultimately, if delegating for profit is the best way to grow my account, then that's going to expand my influence here in future.
Yes, it costs me the ability to drop heavier votes now, but it's a form of saving for the future, building my stake for the long term.
From our various interactions, I would say you have a fairly long term approach to this whole thing... and you're still putting a lot into encouraging community building and such... it's just the mixed messages some people seem to send with what they DO vs. what they SAY for others to do that raises questions, sometimes...
I created steemrewarding.com to help user to keep their stake and helping them earning some curation so that they do not have to delegate their sp. It is possible to add rules that broadcast votes only when the VP is at 100%. It is possible to vote only a specific tag, app, or exclude tags or apps.
Using this tool I can vote manual with a 0,50$ vote and can also let steemrewarding vote for me. Whenever my VP is at 100%, posts from my list will be upvoted. I have also some time based vote rules that help me earning curation rewards.
And that sounds like it's a very flexible initiative... moreso than most out there.
For the sake of transparency, I do delegate to a variety of communities and services. And as a part of delegating I am often rewarded for that.
My activity and interaction on Steem have slowed down a bit over the last few days. I have had periods of time where I have had to step away from Steem for weeks. I don't like it when that happens, but sometimes it does.
That is why I have some of my SP power delegated so that I can earn in other ways.
I agree with you that if someone is very active on Steem but has delegated out a large majority of their Steem to other accounts their actions can be seen as confusing.
What gave rise to my question here was mostly what felt like inconsistency between the evident "lesson" some seem to pass along with their posts... and their practices actually being quite different from what they are preaching.
I get that. What we say and what we do need to match up.
And what is most interesting to me is that if I really want to know what you do on Steem, I have all the resources available. Nothing can be hidden.
Great post! See you around.
I guess that falls under the life-motto of "do as I say, not as I do" :P
I think if they're delegating to bitbots, it's to get curation rewards and being pay for their upvotes, which gives them more rewards than just curating themselves? For other delegations, I guess it depends on the person and what is being delegated to.
I probably just need my head examined because I persist in trying to locate some kind of overriding logic in people's approach to this gig... and I still like to point out "flawed reasoning" and lies people like to tell themselves...
To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.
Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.
Recently I undelegated all my Steem Power and I prefer to curate manually!
Posted using Partiko Android