You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Sample of "nothing at stake" peoples, empowered on 6th day by voting bots!
Man this site is so complex. I really wish things were more straightforward. I have never understood how to use the bots really, so I have never gotten into them. I really wish in some ways that the devs would just ban bots altogether, though I know my opinion is not a popular one, as many people have sunk a large investment into them. If Steemit is really to be this organic place with great original content, I don't really see a necessity or place for the bots. Thanks for drawing attention to the last minute upvotes though! That is such a dick move for people to do. Keep on keeping on!
It's a necessary evil...If you don't have bots how do you get whales to vote on your posts? It's how things have evolved on this decentralized platform. To get an upvote from large accounts you have to be noticed. You can't really get noticed because all the big accounts are self-voting or exchanging each other's votes to swarm the trending pages. There's a lot of good content not being discovered because of this - bots at least give you the chance to crack the top 20 on trending pages.
I have been moving up slowly but surely without bots just by putting out good content on d.tube. I follow this other guy who is on a quest to make 1 million on the platform by not using bots, and after just a month he has already hit 5k. I think it's possible, it's just a slower way there, that's all. Like I said, it's not a popular opinion.
It's a catch-22. Crappy content creators get up on the trending pages by buying upvotes or upvoting themselves with their huge SP. Quality content creators have to do the same to keep up. I know anything is possible on this platform, I don't don't doubt that a plankton can get up to whale status. I'm not opposed to getting rid of upvote bots but they'll have to get rid of whale circle jerks and self-voting altogether - Impossible to do.
That's true. The great whale circle-jerk, and self voting is a huge problem, and the users called out in the article who upvote at the last second. I don't really know what the answers are, so I just keep trucking slowly along haha. Maybe one day things will iron themselves out?
I'm right there with you. These things have got to go. The problem is they have created a Ponzi economy. We need a hero whale that can start disrupting their operations and hopefully, one day, render this vote buying business obsolete.
I'm following you now. People like us need to stick together. I wanted to share one of my projects. Here's the link and meme that may pique your interest.
https://steemit.com/selfvoting/@trump3t/trump3t-the-no-self-voter-promoter-update-hot-edition
Yes, it does offer a vote service but ONLY to no-self voters and the cost is very minimal and will never be powered down as long as self-voting is a thing. (Hopefully, Trump3t will be able to retire one day.) It's not bid based. 0.01 SBD gets you a full weight vote, feature and resteem. I manually screen each and every post. It's intended to help to grow to curate non-self posts and effect change on Steem.
Alright. SBD sent. You've convinced me, I'm going to give it a shot!
How is self voting even allowed, even identifying an account linked to another by some means "multi accounts" should get reduced power when operating closer to an origin account. Instance if an account votes on the same accounts post = 0 , if an account has been voting on every post or comment on another account = 0 . And you can build a whole radius scale based on interaction like that. A lot more complex than what I propose but viable in my opinion.
I agree. There is a lot of voting circle jerks but I will admit that I typically upvote posts for project account I manage intended to serve the Steem community at large. I'm not sure if maybe I should recuse my self from that in the future but I think it's OK on accounts that I do not receive a profit.
I have personally opted out of self-voting and all bid bots.
I do think people should try to diversify their votes. It helps build a better and more connected community.
Problem is that relies on people choosing the moral high ground so to speak. This is a thing for proper automation in my opinion.
Punish everyone equally not reward everyone liberally.
Would have to refine that phrase but pretty sure I just thought of it so BOOM.
Hi @bethwheatcraft . We ( @advertise ) started doing a crowdfunding BitBot campaigns were people group their links into one post and we shoot it to the top of Trending ( well that is the plan) . The thinking is to cleanup some of the mess out there and have one place where people can go to see. We are running a Free campaign now.
This is a great initiative. Never thought such a step could be taken before.
Thanks @ufxpression here is the final product . We are tweaking a few things before we start taking payments to crowdfund to the top.
I DON'T SEE WHY ANYONE IS TAKING THIS POST SERIOUSLY. @GRUMPYCAT HAS BOUGHT VOTES FROM BID BOTS TO UPVOTE THIS VERY POST. GO LOOK BELOW.
This isn't about buying upvotes. It's about buying upvotes after 6 days has elapsed.
Why would that matter? Doesn't it bother you that grumpy cat has probably made more on this single post than any of those spammers? Is grumpycat the central authority figure you want to "handle this issue"? So you're fine with grumpycat upvoting his own comments on this post to the tune of over $200 SBD? Do you feel this $1000 SBD post is of $1000 quality content? did grumpycat write a dissertation and I missed it? am I supposed to believe grumpycat is a moral beacon, here to serve justice? It looks A WHOLE more like grumpycat is here for the money, just like those spammers he purports to be eliminating. This is the worst kind of spam, because it looks legit. But this is just a trash blog, filled with hate, and it's earned more in several days than most Steemian dream to make in a year. Very shameful. If grumpycat wants to convince people he's doing the right thing, why not decline payouts? That seems much more noble.