I Like to Preach About Flagging Sometimes..
In this case, I'm going to go one step further and invite you to practice.
Flags are our tool to fight abuse and bad actors.
This profile is using other people's pictures and stories and voting it up with bots.
We do not have to flag this post to zero, just a few more flags to ensure the post is not profitable will be enough.
A reminder: Steem simulates the Wisdom of the Crowd.
20 people see your post, 10 view it and like it, they upvote it, 5 ignore it and 5 flag it... At the end of the week you get to pocket whatever is left over...
Simple Explanation of how the reward system works:
Each day the Steem Blockchain creates new Steem
That Steem is distributed via our votes
The more stake you hold the more your votes are worth
When you post (or comment) the community has 3 options
- upvote
- downvote/flag
- no action
A post is active for 7 days. When that week is over you get to claim whatever the balance is.
Flags can be overdone, but if more people used them we would have way less garbage.
If you feel the need to remind me that flagging does pay, go ahead, but I happen to think that is one of the dumbest and most immature lines I've I've ever heard. it is just a cost of doing business.
Restaurants don't get paid to clean, they clean because no one wants to eat in a dirty restaurant.
@whatsup,
This is me flagging lol :D So I didn't :D
Cheers~
I just left this comment at @lukestoke's post, but I'll just copypaste it here since it's the same topic:
Upvotes and downvotes are tools to allocate stake. They are the same action, just opposite of each other.
This is the way I've tried to explain it in the past:
If a user feels a post is under-rewarded, he will upvote.
If a user feels a post is over-rewarded, he will downvote.
There's nothing more to it than that. It's a huge double standard that people feel people have the "right" to upvote their content with their full stake, allocating them STEEM, but somehow lack the right to use that same stake to allocate STEEM away to other users.
There have been several members who have enjoyed the regular - sometimes automatic - support of heavy-stake users for every post. They've said nothing. But as soon as another big user has noticed this, and countered with a downvote, all of a sudden it's a huge problem that one user has this much power of the post payouts.
But one user upvoting the posts to big payouts was never a problem. Go figure.
That's the whole point of STEEM power: a say in that particular portion of the reward pool.
Payouts are not your money until the voting window closes. I think this is the biggest hangup a lot of people have.
They are potential payouts, subject to community consensus.
I've tried my damnest to say this so many times. In so many ways.
I see posts that I consider over rewarded, but only flag if I think the votes were not legitimate, e.g. bought by that user when the post didn't justify it, or if the content is illegitimate. I risk retaliation, but I want what's best for Steem.
Agreed. I also saw luke's post and agreed with it as well!
"nods."
Thanks for bringing this to our attention! Maybe this should be a @whatsup series! I'll help flag abusers any day.
Flags are as valid for curation as votes in that they affect rewards and we don't want them going to junk that gives this platform a bad reputation.
The so-called bid bots may choose to take some responsibility for what they vote on. I saw at least one retracted their vote from this user and I've seen others add bad actors to a blacklist thanks to the efforts of those who look for junk. Do the others care about anything apart from a quick profit?
I only flag what's bad for Steem.
I don't mind the idea of the bidbots, but I do agree it would be nice if they helped clean up after themselves.
In any case, we just have to ensure those who abuse with bots aren't profitable and then they will think twice.
'She' didnt do 'herself' any favours by that post. Many of us saw it and flagged it yesterday including myself.
I say 'she' as its likely not someone who looks anyone like the free-to-use image portrayed.
I'm surprised the account hasnt been destroyed yet by @steemcleaners or @spaminator. I think its coming.
maria99 Funds was transferred thru by @blocktrades
It can comes from anywhere ... legally or from Phished Accounts.
This Account @maria99 Funds are from Hacked Funds I believe.
No one in this Platform do have so much Fund unless they are funded by a whale.
The mention Account , should be Destroy!
Will a person know if someone has flagged his/her post, because my problem with downvotes was people often get back to take revenge which obviously wouldn't be in anyone's interest.
Haha, I also just read and commented on @lukestokes's article, so thanks to you as well for bringing this to all our attention. Curation consists of liking and disliking stuff, and it seemingly works well on Amazon, Quora, Reddit etc. but not on Steem. Funny to have your mind blown :-)
Posted using Partiko Android
I think you meant to say that flagging doesn't pay...
Maybe the whole concept of upvoting is wrong. There should be only downvoting. He who gets the least downvotes gets the most. It would eliminate a lot of crap that's being posted.
That's kind of a genius idea to be honest
Interesting... Inflation gets distributed to those without flags. :)