The Giveaway was discontinued on 14-Dec-2017.

All xrp will be sent out from account r4fDrPVM47i3WxKCNpJmHwZrjcbaCGf6tb To monitor the payouts, browse to my ripple-wallet change wallet account to r4fDrPVM47i3WxKCNpJmHwZrjcbaCGf6tb view history tab.

if you already sent 30xrp to the address. then your account is already activated, and my bot wont sent any xrp to this address. if you like to get this 20xrp, try with another new (un-activated) ripple

my bot only response to first-level replies. please reply directly to the post. :)

to get the 20xrp, please make a new reply with only your new address r4vSmuQ7coTTrPE8ZUUH6fK1YyBJgXSfZp. the giveaway is automated with a bot, it won't response if your reply consist anything other than

The 50xrp statement is misleading... 20xrp is sufficient to activate an account and allow you to create two trustlines.

something wrong with the imgsafe servers, updated the links with new links. Thanks for notification.

迟些若有空儿，我会写相关的中文系列。

But there's no significant efforts and time if one is using bots. Exactly.... that's the main reason why curation reward should be removed. curator who don't use bot will probably get much less than 1%,

SP holders who don't curate are losing about 8% annually, but if they curate, it will decrease to around 4~6%. financially speaking, the 3% difference is just too small to justified the time and effort

Curation rewards provides a financial incentive for users to spend a very significant amount of their time discovering good content. NO, in terms of financial amount, the curation reward is far from enough

HF0.17 的代理機制相當不錯，它可以提供小用戶另一種參與感。 以下是我想像到的一種情況：把 Steemit 弄成論壇模式，curation 的工作主要由少數一群版主來執行。小用戶除了可以親自點贊/踩貼以外，還可以把投票權代理出去給自己屬意的版主。版主在幫助用戶執行 curation 的同時，可以從中分得收益，一舉兩得。而小用戶們發出去代理權，其實就像是給版主的信任票，無形中構成了一個民主化的版主選舉制度。

老實說，對於大部分的用戶來說，由於 SP 太小點贊收益其實是微乎其微。 因此，長期來看收益並不太可能成為一個鼓勵大家點贊/踩貼的主要動機。（除了少部分 SP大戶） 相反，很多時候我們點贊/踩貼並不是為私利，而是純粹希望好貼作者能得到獎賞，壞貼沉底。而目前的計算機制會放大 大戶的投票權重，讓人覺得小戶的票可有可無、被邊緣化，沒有參與感，也就放棄投票。

support... the word 'flag' is somehow discouraging people from using their downvotes. switch back to the more neutral 'downvote' wording could drive the community back to a more healthy up/down ratio.

You get same return no matter vote for what, the only factor is downvotes cast by others. this is true. The pure-linear approach work best in the situation where the community members are actively flagging

good idea... sounds like a subscription. an author will get my votes automatically if i had subscribed to his/her blog. then good writers who had accumulated some subscribers might begin to see a stable

if i understand correctly, it's just an independent database, where the data on blockchain is continuously being copied into it.

can't believe there's still such a tribe in 21-century.

I wonder is it technically possible to mask the votes amount with some cryptogrphy until the end of voting round?

Good point... overlook this scenario.