I for one think that this is a matter of common decency.
Imagine someone with an upvote value of around $20 and is posting 5 blog posts a day, all in low-quality content. While it is not technically wrong or illegal since anyone is entitled on how they want to use their stake on Steem, but when you take into consideration other users in the platform especially those planktons or minnow who are just starting out and invested a lot of time and effort into creating a quality post, it's obviously not fair to them!!
But what about those accounts whose upvote value is around $0.01?
I highly recommend not upvoting your own blog posts/comments even if are only posting One Post/Day. Based on my personal experience, it is so much better to spend that $0.01 full upvote value to authors who are engaging with your content and authors who share the same interests as you.
Speaking from experience, I have had a few people here who supported me back after I always give them my full upvote. It's the thought that counts they say. XD
So yeah! I highly recommend if your upvote value is less than $1 to just spend it to people who shares the same interests as you as they are likely to support you back. Not to mention that sometimes especially if they are a good writer, the curation rewards you get from upvoting their content is almost always double. :)
There are also of arguments about this on steemit. If you have loads of steem power, giving for example 20 quid to yourself sounds like a plan. I would be very attracted to upvoting myself in this situation . Some whale accounts just upvote themselves and you all know who leaving no curation for the rest of us. So thats one extreme. I do not upvote myself because I think that it is not worth it with the steempower I hold. My upvote is only a few cent so there is no point. I don't like giving myself a clap or a pat on the back so I dont do it. Some guys do it after the rest of the pool gets their curation. I think this isn't too bad. If you use bots you are not really growing, you are only growing your rep score and nothing else. When you stop using bots then what have you left. An empty shell of an account. What I did was upvote others so they will in turn follow you and maybe upvote some of your stuff. Find your people and some of them might even be whales and an upvote from them can be way more than a bot or self vote.
Yes. If the quality of your content were the only factor allowed to influence your payouts and if you were not allowed to self-upvote at all (say, if voting your posts from anonymous alt accounts were somehow made impossible), then pray tell why would you ever power up? To help other people make money? Now, you could enter into an agreement with other users to vote each other in a circle. But that's effectively the same as self-upvoting. If self-upvoting were made impossible and the system were, by some miracle, capable of making circumventing the ban on self-upvoting completely impossible, there would be no reason whatsoever to power up except for a philanthropist. Philanthropy is not investing.
Interestingly, I think I've just articulated the fundamental problem of stake-based voting as a method to reward quality content. In practice, what most stakeholders of Steem do is a mixture of both effectively self-voting and voting for the purposes of curating content for the benefit of the whole platform. 25% of the STEEM created in every block goes to curators. Some have argued that the percentage should be 50% to make curation great again. The problem is that we actually want content-discerning curation which is what bid bots are not about and bid bots pay curation rewards to delegators.
I think we should accept that Steem has many partially conflicting goals and what we are witnessing in real life is an imperfect compromise. Things will get interesting with SMTs as we will then have many competing tokens each free to implement any payout model the creators wish. Hopefully, STEEM will increasingly become a resource token and that curation will be increasingly be done using SMTs as rewards each tailored to a niche.
The question of "should I self-vote" should be followed by the question of: When should I upvote my own posts?
If one upvotes early, they deny curation rewards to others.
Some people self-vote on day five. This has the affect of increasing the curation rewards for the post.
The makers of SteemIt sold the currency as an investment. People who bought the coin as an investment feel compelled to self-vote. I cannot fault people who bought the coin with this in mind when they invested in STEEM.
BTW: busy.org auto-upvotes new posts. It is an annoying feature.
Based on my experience you shouldn't be up voting your own post. There are a couple of reasons I think why you should not up vote you post and they are as follows:-
1. If you are new to the platform and if you up vote your own post than it wont give you anything since your Voting Power doesn't contribute to any amount due to low Steem power. Instead use the up voting for networking with other fellows and up vote content which you really like. This, will help you get more followers to your blog and you would automatically start getting up votes from your followers.
2. Every-time you up vote a percentage of Voting Power diminishes. So, instead of wasting it up voting your own content or post use it wisely reading others post to learn and up vote those post which you feel deserves to be up voted.
3. Finally, self up vote is not considered good by the community. So, why get into it when the community does not recommend it.
Hope this helps. Thanks.
It depends on quite a few things.
How big is your account and how many votes you have per day. If you are new and restricted to say 5 votes per day then you need to use them as a tool to grow. The only way you are going to grow is by having people follow you.
Reading posts and commenting is the only way to grow when you have limited resources. If you vote yourself it may have no value and be so small it is lost and is burned. That would be a total waste and benefit no one. Your vote is part of your strength along with a good comment.
I have a 6c vote at the moment and don't upvote my own posts. I see it as more valuable sharing what I have as I receive more back in votes and follows.
It's a question of morals and values. Do you feel it's ok to use your Vote Power on yourself instead of supporting the work of other people? If you do, then it's ok to self upvote.
The usual compromise is upvoting your own posts but not your own comments.
In the normal economy, would you spend all your money on others and nothing on yourself?
Yes, you absolutely should upvote at least one of your own posts a day. Holding SteemPower is important to the economy of Steem.
Holding SteemPower should be rewarded and also you should upvote the posts that you like. If you don't like your own post, who will?