For those who are confused over the payouts on Hive.
Serious topic.
I've seen some critique lately on how people get downvoted for their posts, and how they are being "ripped off" or how they are "losing their income".
If you think like that, You are wrong!
Whatever you see here...
...does not mean your income for that post is 3.07 Hive. This is only the potential reward. The only reward you can call "income" is the one that is actually paid on the day 7, after the posting. The potential reward might jump, or it might dive, depending on how the post is received by those who read it.
This is what actual income looks like:
It tells you exactly how much was paid, and how much the author's income for that post was.
If your post gets downvoted, it does not mean you lost your income. You only lost the potential income.
Now, you might ask "what about when the potential was over $200, and it was lost?"
Easy. You were not entitled to that $200 in the first place.
Ask yourself: "Out of my own pocket, how much would I personally pay someone else for this same article I am publishing?"
Did this make sense to you?
The thing is, when You came to HIVE, nobody signed a contract with You over how much you would be earning, or what your income would be.
After all, the whole "potential earning" aspect of Hive comes only secondary to the other strengths of the blockchain; immutability, resiliency, and uncensorability.
And no, downvotes are not censorship. What you write on the blockchain, will remain there forever. That's a thing to consider.
If you read this far, I will thank you for your attention.
I'll be seeing you all later.
The Follow-up post The vote is not free explains why the upvote is not free, and why the downvote is absolutely necessary.
Let us be honest. Most of us would not pay nothing. Fortunately/Luckily we do not have to pay out of our own pockets, when we reward others on the Hive blockchain.
That is exactly why it is so difficult for many to see the reasoning behind the downvote. Because voting seemingly doesn't cost us anything (it actually does*), we easily lose the healthy appreciation for honest work.
* The reason I don't think voting is free, is because we are currently doing, or have either done much of the work to cumulate our own voting power, or invested in it, or both.
It is a post worthy of a hefty reward as it was informative and interesting. Thanks
Hey just lurking on this topic and giving my 2 cents of a user before signing off, it's interesting to see it like that splitted on peakd, it's the way it is (depending on the communities, etc).
"If your post gets downvoted, it does not mean you lost your income. You only lost the potential income."
I would put it more, "I didn't earn (nothing earned nothing lost) the potential income" because someone decided so. Also those downvotes i believe also blanks the curators money like you highlighted in that one so about half is from curators...
Not disagreeing with the downvote function btw, it's just how it is no ? I just don't like the FAT downvotes on journalistic articles / investigations, including medical information.
Depends on the type of information. How would you see someone downvoting articles promoting products like Doramad under the guise of "medical information"?
I've also seen people promote amygdalin "vitamin B17" pills for treating cancer. Would you be okay for people upvoting "medical information" promoting pills that hydrolyze into cyanide, and can actually kill someone?
How would you feel about downvoting the guy who gave "medical information" to HIV and AIDS patients suggesting they drop their medication because HIV/AIDS, according to his information, is a hoax?
In all of these cases, I have and will continue to downvote 100%. Their informational value is less than 0.
That may be, but it only means that someone disagreed with the amount shown.
Many of these conspiracy theory posts that recently have popped up are pretty much carbon copies of eachother.
They really are a dime in a dozen.
There is no creative value in them. There's no productive value either.
So I fail to see why a post like that should be rewarded at all.
Yes, and that is only because they upvoted a nonproductive post that doesn't add any value to the subject at hand or the Hive community, be it artistic or journalistic. They might as well be better trying and finding other, actually productive and informative posts to curate to make better returns.
I observe and see medics speaking and writing experiences, studies, not many but i do, many of them are listed here on hive through 3rd party interviews or transcripts / quotes. I agree that you can reprove of medical information that can cause death instead of healing specially if it's "mandated" (which is what the journalists, activists, etc, are actually doing) through downvotes, but it would be more efficient to debate i think. What good does it do if "you" are not standing up for the reasoning. It goes to waste, time, resources, reputation, etc.
Also i was making a point and trying to confirm, the curators also loose the rewards right ? So it's a multi loss. Heck, speaking of delegated power, if the author is delegating to the account downvoting his own post wouldn't that be self destruction ? What a matrix. It is what it is for now, fluctuating alot and unpredictable most of the times.
PS: I heard fauci and gates were around in the AIDS epidemic :P
!gif matrix
Via Tenor
I'm not against debating the stuff, but I would not suggest rewarding it in the first place, after all rewarding such ill advice may indeed cause someone to take it seriously and end up taking their life.
I would not want to live with something like that on my conscience.
They might, but even if that were actually the case, they will make it back in their other curations. Better not upvote crap in the first place.
Nope, because you will still get daily rewards for delegating.
Truth is, You already know it before publishing, that a post that's not deserving of hundreds of dollars with "too promising" potential rewards will most likely get downvoted before payout. You just don't want to accept that truth, and you post it anyway. Many make the same mistake, you are not alone in this.
But don't for once think you are rightfully entitled to those potential rewards.
That sentence carries absolutely no value.
| Depends on the type of information.
Probably stupid to stick my neck out, but whatever, let’s do it.
I disagree whole-heartedly. When in doubt, Darwinism. I want to make my choice, based on all the information. And, as is waaaaaaay too often the case with me, chances are I’ll make a lot of bad decisions. Still up to me, and I don’t want my entire world interpretation to come solely from controlled sources. “Protect me from my own stupidity” will never appeal to me. I am proudly stupid, but unquestionably smarter because of all the bad decisions I’ve learned from. If one day I make a choice based on foolish information, it means Darwinism is still firmly in place, my research efforts were sub-par, and I died from the cause of poor execution of freedom of choice.
You want to make that choice every time, or just once?
Look, I am all for making a choice based on all the information too, but once I learn certain information is false, I do not need to expose myself to that misinformation anymore.
I agree. I also don’t think it is for me or anyone else to remove from others the opportunity to exercise the same process of discovery and judgement.
My potential income is Build HP & Curation. I didn't thought how powerful it is until this year!
$WINE
Cheers~
Congratulations, @theguruasia You Successfully Shared 0.200 WINEX With @gamer00.
You Earned 0.200 WINEX As Curation Reward.
You Utilized 2/2 Successful Calls.
Contact Us : WINEX Token Discord Channel
WINEX Current Market Price : 0.342
Well said and straight to the point. People just don't get it... It's not yours till post payout. Simple
Yeah, i am agree and appreciate with you that before engaging in hive we never singed any where that are bound to maintain except few community joined. But the payout are maintained with few hive power holder and acting like god upon few minnows and others who can make passive income, anyway its very good analytical information upon a certain point.
This is simply not true. Most of the posts on Hive do not get downvoted by anyone.
While we can't control the whales on what they upvote or don't, we can control our own output. We can provide quality content, that gets upvoted by people. If the quality does not match the potential rewards, there is always the possibility, that the post will get downvoted. We already know that before we post.
This is why we can't make demands on the system, or those who oversee it.
You can try to game it, but it will eventually be your own downfall when you get found out.
Yes, I understand, and I believe all the whales understand, that with great power, comes great responsibility. Part of that responsibility is to be fair.
Which act do you think is more unfair, A) letting undeserving posts get huge rewards, while deserving posts get nothing, or B) downvote those who weren't really deserving of those rewards, and returning that value back to the system so that others who actually do deserve it, might get the chance?
Yeah, its true that content and post should be relevant with payout and great power comes with a big responsibility.
Great info , thanks for sharing
My gran told me a few truths back in the day... before we wrapped people up in cotton wool..
society seems to think they are owed a living.... no.. go out there and earn one!!!
Excellent advice you got there! Got to relish the wisdom of grandparents, it is very rare these days.
it is... and where it is.. not many listen unfortunately
Only payout determines your actual income and besides those that upvote you, deserves to be rewarded too.
Those who scale through here, just enjoy doing what the do.
That’s why some curation trail follows them.
10 votes from sbi wow! How many shares you have?
!PIZZA
I've been sponsoring many accounts during my stay here, but I haven't really taken a look at my own shares.
Wow 1506. I just started my journey of giving, hope so I reach your point one day :)
Oh, that's where it was! Thanks.
I sent you a share.
Thanks! I will encourage me to share more also. :)
!PIZZA
PIZZA Holders sent $PIZZA tips in this post's comments:
@dlmmqb(5/7) tipped @gamer00 (x2)
Please vote for pizza.witness!
I don’t think anyone was ever confused about the difference between income and “potential income.” I genuinely don’t. But I can agree with you in that there is a difference. I would, however, also say then that intentionally stripping away all of someone’s “potential” earnings on a post is still not particularly cool.
Yeah, well everyone is allowed to vote on that potential income, so I wouldn't say it is necessarily uncool either.
I would guess someone getting hundreds of dollars or euros for a blog post with almost no effort for original content is probably not okay by you either, unless it happens to you.
No, I tried to be clear, and specific. That was not an accidental omission. Although where I could have been clearer is in that I don’t disagree with idealogical downvotes, particularly since upvotes are doled out by that same measure. What’s not cool (and I want to stress, in my opinion), is throwing, for example, a $300 downvote at a $300 post. One vote wiping out the votes of many. I hope this helps, and sincerely, I appreciate you and your having a different opinion. These kinds of open and honest discussions are critical. Thanks for taking the time to reply.
#whoisalbuslucimus
I don´t agree.
There ARE cases of unjustified, sneaky, last-minute downvotes.
Just because this is fortunately not the rule but exceptions rather, there are attempt to mute people, just because they have different opinions.
Yes I understand your concern, as I too have been a target of such actions by whales. Nevertheless, I don't consider that out of the rules by any stretch of imagination. Anyone has the right to disagree with the payment at any given moment during the 7 day evaluation period.
It doesn't mean it is a winning strategy for the whale doing it either, and because votes are not really free, it comes with a price. If it is done precariously, it will directly devalue the whale's own investment, as people come vary of either posting quality, or posting at all.
But what I believe will eventually happen whether there are bad whales or not, is that when Hive will come more popular (think 5x, 10x users), the whale vote ceases to count, because of the sheer amount of minnows, little fish and dolphins will outnumber their originally huge votes.
We may still see $300 downvotes, but that will change as volume grows. The whales, orcas and dolphins will likely be busy downvoting normal spam instead.
All true, but when? Hive incl. its predecessor is >5y old. Will the numbers ever be 5x in this decade? Look at the current "growth rate".
The whales will still for a very long time dominate and be able to put off many people.
It's all okay to be pessimistic, but truth be said the whole crypto world is still very young. We've not seen real massive adoption yet. But I believe it will be coming sooner or later and the floodgates will be opened.
The hive account creation process is still a bit of a hassle, and there are also quite a few things we still could improve in the authentication process. So, while we are definitely making progress (Splinterlands et. al.), we are currently not even close to being ready for the big masses yet.
That’s cleared it up for me. I’m new here and I spotted the words “potential reward” and I’m fine with that. I think that’s an amazing concept. Too many entitled people these days, truth is they have to build trust and reliability first.
I think a lot of us can learn from hive!
Yep... And sometimes those downvote hits are for good reasons..
So much abuse here it's crazy
Gotta help those watching over the blockchain and get involved in governance.
Excellent penetrating insight. Thanks for sharing brother!