A frustrated writer!
21st of March 2022
This article is written in lieu of my previously written article The random rewarder's fault! where I mentioned not being properly upvoted by @TheRandomRewarder as a reflection of it's (random rewarder) inability to follow up with certain words stated in it's article titled Have I tipped you?
As mentioned earlier, the upvotes received on my articles have diminished from a range of $4 to $8 and above to a range of $1 to $3 in the last three months which is frustrating. I tried ignoring the diminish in upvotes while maintaining and in fact increasing my level of interaction with the hope that the upvotes will return to the initial by focusing on improving my writing skills and spending more time on research and fact compilation in order to produce articles with higher qualities.
The quality of my articles have increased with time. They have become more interesting and attractive to my readers. In fact, I tend to get new readers and commenters in each case based on the content of the articles.
For instance, articles like Ten (10) pets that ate their owners, Ten (10) most mysterious places on earth, Five (5) most dangerous places on earth, Ten (10) Dark recommended Animes and so on have brought entirely new users to my comment. A proof that the articles have been found interesting. Unfortunately, the random rewarder says otherwise- the upvotes by rusty are enough evidence.
I have a lot more articles like this which weren't properly appreciated hashtag rusty for reasons unknown. If the excuse of not being properly upvoted is a lack of interaction or "adequate interaction" then I would have to say that "this excuse is invalid ". Here is a link to my activities if it needs to be checked. I only lowered my interaction in the past three days out of frustration, but my articles have retained its quality and have also become better.
If my daily interaction is not deemed "worthy" or "sufficient", it will have to beg the question of- "what level of interaction is considered adequate?".
In the end, the upvotes received is in an inverse proportion to the quality of my articles which is very weird considering that the random rewarder's statement says other wise. I quoted this statement yesterday, and will like to quote it once more as stated in Have I tipped you?- "The more interesting article is for the audience, the more I tip".
If getting interactions from more other users- both new and old based on the quality of the article written isn't considered "interesting" according to the random rewarder, then what does the statement "Interesting for the audience" mean, considering that I have come across a lot of articles with zero interactions from other users but still get massively upvoted by the random rewarder?
I find the above situation weird. Not out of jealousy but because all requirements for an article to be considered "interesting" and "of high quality" have been met. Unless there are other definitions of "interesting" and "high quality" which I may be missing or may have forgotten. I'd like to be reminded.
I mentioned earlier that I'd be sending a mail to @Read.Cash while addressing this issue in the friendliest way possible. The mail was sent this morning with hopes that a response will be gotten, or perhaps adjustments will be made where necessary according to their jurisdiction. In case I have been doing something wrong, I'm hoping to be informed as well so I can make corrections where necessary.
I know a certain number of users will probably state in the comments that I shouldn't focus on the earnings but focus on writing quality articles and simply have fun with it. A very wonderful statement which I'd agree with if I were just starting my journey on this platform.
As a 7 months+ user, the diminish in the upvoted received from rusty began about three months ago and is getting worse daily, hence it should be addressed considering the latest development on my account is a far cry from the initial. I'd like to remind "these users" that read.cash is a platform where you create quality content in form of articles and get paid in BCH for doing so.
According to a statement by @Read.Cash in it's article What is read.cash? / FAQ, I quote "read.cash is a platform where you can publish content (articles with images and videos) and earn Bitcoin Cash cryptocurrency (ticker: BCH) for doing so". Hence, I should be able to address the issue being discussed since I feel I am no longer upvoted properly by the random rewarder. This is not Facebook or twitter. On read.cash, the earning is the reward!
In the end, I am nothing but a frustrated writer whose effort is being frustrated. Regardless of this frustration, I will continue to write quality articles and will hope that a response which will result in a change is gotten in lieu of the mail sent to read.cash via hello@read.cash.
I think the instant interaction of the articles is not taken into account, otherwise there would be no articles with very low interaction among the best. The author may be looking at the interest in other articles, the interaction there, and the quality of his own writing. These are my observations. December and January were also bad months for me, it improved partially in February and I can say that March is better.