cyber racist :P

i may have created something new :p For me, as i have said countless times there needs to be some balance. If you self vote one of your posts even 2 daily that's ok, it's your money. At the same time you may interact with others and vote a bunch of other posts as well.

Now if you make 5-6 posts and upvote them all especially with a vote that worth a lot and at the same time you don't vote others (or only 2-3 friends) then there is a problem.

It's not that easy though to make assumptions because we don't know of the situation or the mindset. Someone may face economical difficulties and by self-voting he can help himself or his family. Another one may not have that much free time. So it's really hard for me to start accusing people without clear "proof"

Now what i try to do is write max 2 posts per day (95% of the time is 1 post), i upvote myself and then i try to interact with others and upvote their posts/comments. My vote is currently worth close to 20 cents so that means i earn 10 cents with my full vote. Even if i earned 10$ i would still 100% upvote myself both because i deem my posts worth that much and i put a lot of effort into creating them and because my wallet is empty in real life :P

10$ is my limit though, i won't self-vote with more than that, but that's me. If someone follows all the "good" things from above i don't care even if he self-votes with a 50$.

Now if we continue this and say ok, we need to distribute the upvotes "fairly", how can we deem which post deserves it? Everyone votes with their own criteria. Let's say someone upvotes me with 20$, another may think that my post is actually worth 0.

Many don't even check what they vote as well, i mean the context. They may know the author so "ahh ok a post from, it will be totally good" and upvote it. Heck even if i write a post, then copy it and instead of publishing it, told to a known author to do it from his profile instead of me, i bet he will receive the same rewards :P

Posted Using LeoFinance ^Beta