Ask the Hive

Is it wrong to vote same authors over and over again on the Hive blockchain?

I was enjoying my vacation and as I had more time on my hand for family, but also my hobbies like crypto I stopped at a question that is hovering in this ecosystem for a long time: Is it wrong to vote same authors over and over again on the Hive blockchain? My simple answer: No. But my more detailed answer is that we should not stop at only that and even if the regular authors keep on writing articles and bringing information we are interested in, it is great to outreach to the outside world and find new authors to network with. In my case while there are some authors from which I also got inspired to build apps or do certain investments, I am trying also to discover new content around me and from that to follow and upvote new authors. I don't always find such gems in the sea of Hive, but I am periodically trying to look for that. I think just one or two weeks ago I found a new comer to Hive and while he only had two or three articles, I truly appreciated his value in the writings and found even common ground. And I visit his posts from time to time and from that point it is in my personal feed.

One of the period that I am doing this is when I don't have much time on my hands. In such hectic times when I don't know how to split anymore the time for work and family, I need to chip out some time from my hobbies or less "human" demanding activity. For me that's crypto where even if someone would think it is passive, that's quite not like that. So when I am put at the wall due to time constraints, I usually tend to visit "My feed" where my regular content creators are present. And my comments (if I can afford the time to do even that) and the upvotes will probably go to regular authors as I easily identify with their content and already trust the quality of work and usefulness of information they put out there. And many times I ended up acting upon that on my own investments and the last example was COTI where from @cryptoandcoffee I found out the Treasury rewards will be put on pause and there are some exchanges offering staking rewards. So that's a move I did just following concentrated content from my favorites. [PeakD - Following Feed]

Besides such cringe periods, I think it is good to explore also other authors and that's what I am trying to do through Discovery. On PeakD in the Feeds I just hit the Discovery tab and a new world of opportunity opens for me. I must say that I am not into much food, nature or household content (even if at times I enjoy that as well), but looking more for finance, investments, personal experiences or even photography. Probably there are other categories but for now, as I am sipping a coffee no other comes to mind. What I like when discovering new content is to see a new passion or hobby or just something different from the ordinary. That sparkles some excitement into me and with that probably that creator will end up with a 100% upvote, a king comment and a following. I am following as many people as I interact with and that I like the content, I am not afraid of hitting the FOLLOW button even if at some point my feed might get cluttered. But in such bearish times, believe me, it doesn't as from the 954 followers I think about 5% are posting in such times. [PeakD - Discovery Feed]

So if you ask me if it is wrong to vote same authors over and over again on the Hive blockchain, my answer would be No, but with some of the above flavors. And what I want everyone to understand that is looking under the hood on Hive, gathering stats and checking patterns, is that it is not just a simple math equation to categorize one or another falling into such mechanics. Sometimes it is the time that comes in which makes it normal to just upvote who you know and continue your life, some other times is because you don't find other content with which to get common ground and so much more... thus upvoting is still a personal and subjective action and it is hard to frame it 100% just with stats and numbers. At least that's how I see it. 😊

Comments · 10

@aljif7(74)· 2d
Once upon a time, it happened that for years I didn't see any support on my posts. I was surprised to find most of my supporters here and discovered how we try to support each other.

For those years when I saw almost nothing, I felt the best I could do was support as many authors as I saw in my feed. A lot of times I would reblog the ones I found, or I would leave an elaborate answer/comment. Sometimes it happens just like when you buy a book expecting to read one thing; what I discovered is a new favourite author.

On Hive, time is against the incentive; after 7 days, the incentive to interact becomes lower. What we should realize is that even if the 7 days have passed, we can still generate some value with our interactions.
@cryptoreforma(72)· 3d
Yes, that’s wrong.

Allow me to disagree, and to be direct and forthright.

Hive is built on two protocols that form the foundation of the ecosystem: Proof of Stake and Proof of Brain.

In Proof of Stake, those who hold a large amount of HP (whales) can indeed vote for the same authors—provided the posts deserve it. Those with a modest HP shouldn’t always vote for the same authors.

In Proof of Brain, the distribution of votes is guided by human judgment. Curation is an act of governance: voting patterns determine which content thrives and who is rewarded. If we always vote for the same authors, we’re limiting the people who can be rewarded, and much content will never thrive.

“Of the 954 followers, I think about 5% are posting these days.” Why do you think that is? Eventually, many came to the conclusion that it’s not worth it because only a few are rewarded.

It’s no coincidence that over the past two years, the number of users has dropped dramatically. Nor is it a coincidence that in recent weeks and months, more HIVE has been sold than has remained staked.

When we vote only for our own authors, we’re undermining the ecosystem’s credibility, because we’re not respecting the essence of Proof of Brain. And when that happens, people leave and the value of HIVE drops. Several key stakeholders have already stated that this is harmful, because it hinders user retention and makes it unlikely that new users will stick around.

One of the tools that can measure the health of the ecosystem, in this sense, is ManteCurated Live

I feel apprehensive when I analyze the results of some HIVE stakeholders. In many cases, the results do not reflect what these stakeholders truly contribute to HIVE. The results do not match the passion and dedication these same stakeholders bring to HIVE. The results do not do justice to what these stakeholders represent within HIVE.

I don’t accept the argument that new content and authors don’t appear in the feeds—"that’s precisely why they don’t exist". In this post, I suggest searching directly within the communities. The feeds aren’t reliable—neither on HIVE nor on other Web2 and Web3 platforms. Relying on algorithms is a mistake.

I understand that many stakeholders, as is your case, don’t have time to discover new content and authors. I understand that it’s more comfortable to vote for the same authors.

The only way I can help is by suggesting that you follow “curated” feeds from users who take care to curate content based on diversity, breadth, and a fairer distribution of votes and rewards.

Sorry the comment got so long.
@costanza(78)· 3d
The way I see it, auto-votes are crucial for Hive.

Having the ability to build your blog over time, getting a following which eventually comes with a small-medium 'guaranteed' post payout is a large part of what makes Hive attractive.

The reality is that 99%+ of content on Hive is just pure garbage, not interesting to most, often just chasing the upvotes that come from certain challenges or communities. Nobody in their right mind would ever spend money to buy Hive, power it up, browse through Hive posts, and give out upvotes, curating what is good and what they like.

What I do see as something that works here, is that you have your blog, find like-minded people or those who share the same interests, make friends & put them into your auto-upvote list. I tried to find new users to support in the past, but it pretty much always turns out the same way. Sooner than later, they give up and move on, cashing out what they earned and never come back.

I do tend to be a bit lazy when it comes down to my auto-vote list, but will start to re-configure it now that I'm growing my HP stake agressively. Friends that I made will always get a spot on it, aside from that, I mainly just look at
1. Is someone good for Hive, all bad KE accounts will get kicked off, there is no excuse not to fix it at these price levels.
2. Posting & Content consistency: I generally tend to prefer bloggers who have their niche of what they are obsessed with and have a genuine blog (It's rather rare unfortunately)
3. Those that upvote me: Since honestly I don't care that much about most content, those that meet #1 & #2 who also upvote me obviously will get higher on my list compared to those who are not.
I'm also thinking of starting some kind of auto-upvote list for newer & smaller accounts (once my stake is big enough), reserving 20% of my votes or so for those who meet the criteria. (Showing they are here for the long run, willing to invest some, content that is consistent and made with some passion behind it) . I would not actively search for them but instead allow anyone to apply.

So as an individual user on Hive, I don't think there is anything wrong with voting on the same people especially if if are ones who are here for the long run and are building their stake instead of just leeching rewards.

What I don't like is seeing curation groups just automatically voting on the same accounts (I believe it happens because the ones curating are also just lazy wanting an easy earnings instead of doing the work plowing through the garbage to find undiscovered users or content). Often the accounts that always get votes also just cash everything out and have horrible KE.
@finpulse(77)· 3d
I vote some authors whom I have been voting for long because they are committed to hive and their content is also good. Apart from that I also vote some new authors who I think are good so there has to be a balance.
@wiseagent(81)· 3d
Depending on the quality of the content they publish, I don't see any problem at all (especially when there's a lack of better options to vote for).
@borsengelaber(76)· 3d
The creators I like and ins some cases made Friends with I support regularly. But I am also regularly checking my communities for creators I haven‘t discovered yet. Some I Support occasionally, some become regular „Upvoting targets“. It all flows and evolves. Keep on Hiving guys! 🙌🏻
@josediccus(83)· 3d
There are people I've voted all over for a long while, and some I really enjoy how they share their personal experience, others I've done the same for because formed a sort of relationship over the years. I'm opening to meeting more people, but life and work and raking care of the family always gets in the way..
@asgharali(78)· 3d
In my view, whenever you come across good, informative, new or interesting content you should upvote it.

Of course, old content writers have their own place and value.

I personally prefer content writers whose KE ratio is below 1. I believe they should be supported more, as they deserve encouragement...
@ronnie10(68)· 3d
I think it depends. Sometimes, you enjoy certain authors and support them. But, at the same time, I think it is important to also support others who are outside your network.
@katerinaramm(78)· 3d
I totally agree, it is not bad to support same authors and add new ones if you find something interesting. I am happy to see that many of my old friends on chain are still here, holding, building, creating : ) Not giving up. Community is what can keep people together.. Hope you still have some holiday left!