One question is running through my mind right now - how best to split the vote. At 100% of the value or divided into fractions, starting with 10%.
This dilemma started after I read some posts of my friend 
The problem is that I do the same, I came to this choice without realizing it, naturally and now I wonder what the reasons are for this choice.
Of course, not the same ones that 
That's how the notion of "TORUK" came and the big vote from
The best posts, the ones that bring value and good quality information can come from the most experienced, who receive the highest rewards anyway because of their recognized value. By my logic, the less experienced and skilled can still receive the highest vote for a special comment, this is easier to do because a good post can provoke a good comment.
I repeat, I don't make these statements because I saw the blogs that received TORUK's visit, so not from an analysis of the facts. I'm trying to check my logic, to see if it still works.
If there is anyone who does not know about this project can read here: TORUK Was Here
Apparently, the reason I vote only 100% would be two: laziness and low value of HP or LP.
Of course, when you have a very high vote value, it is normal to divide the vote as many as possible. Working 10+ a day is unusual and I don't think anyone does it anymore, only in Leo Finance something like this can happen and that explains in a way the success of this community.
Elsewhere, the vote thus divided is divided automatically and generally pursues other purposes.
Coming back to me, I'm not really that lazy and I don't get bored easily but I can't (and because of the not very good English I know) read more than ten or twenty posts a day. Consequently, I don't have to vote several times so as to be forced to split the vote.
Many times the vote is given on the basis of reciprocity and I know colleagues who calculate quite exactly the vote they give to be similar to the one they receive. That reminds me of an incident with a good friend. An incident that shocked me!
One of my best friends, although we see each other quite rarely, we have been friends for over 35 years. Much younger than me and ... a millionaire! In a difficult period for me he helped me a lot, he hired me in two of his companies and he helped me get through a few years with problems. I am grateful for his support.
What happened.
When I celebrated my birthday, my friend gave me a pair of headphones as a gift, we are both music lovers and listeners. When he gave me the gift he told me that he chose to buy me a pair of relatively modest headphones in terms of quality and price because if he had taken a more expensive gift from me, without any effort for him, it would have meant to force me to make him an expensive gift when it will be his birthday, which I could not have done.
I was shocked, although I didn't show it. I would never have thought of this way of reciprocity (especially between friends).
Of course, the years spent in business, meetings and negotiations changed the way he was (in our youth we were almost as poor).
This incident made me wonder if this way of calculating the value of one gift based on the financial power of the other to do the same in return is correct. I thought it was normal for it to matter only how much the giver could pay, because the joy is as great for the giver as for the receiver.
I think because of this event (of course, left in my subconscious) I like to vote only 100%, regardless of whether the recipient is "richer" or "poorer' than me and, fortunately, I notice that there are many in Leo Finance who do the same!
