BidBots - THEY DO NOT DRAIN THE STEEM REWARDPOOL!

4년 전

When you hear people lying about BidBots, send them to this article about the history of STEEM voting, curation and changes.

piscina_futurista3.jpg

Once upon a time, people would be voting for themselves and their "friends" and only that. Yes, it was a nasty time for everyone on STEEM, I remember as a young minnow/small dolphin that my voting power was next to nothing, it just turned the button blue and no visible money was added to the rewards.

Then someone came up with a scheme to sell up or downvotes on the black market, a really easy way to make sure to become a witness, trend all your posts, make you a star - for money of course.

And the voting-power, omg, I remember looking at whale accounts with 20% votingpower, now that is how you know the rewardpool is being raped.

The updates known as HF19 and HF20 changed the game in consensus with the majority of stakeholders, creating a stake based and only stake based economy, the GOLD STANDARD

Now there were no real benefits to "circle-jerk" anymore, so self-voting became the calculated way to milk your own cow, but there is something to be said about the wisdom of "do to others what you want others to do to you". I do not want to post 10 posts per day and upvote myself and only myself, lol, that would just create flags against me from other users with more steempower then me and instead of gaining more stake, I would be losing most of it and at the same time lose other people money which would lead to conflicts and capitulation back to the drawing board.

Risenga02.jpg

BidBots trigger when their vote power is 100% and stop voting when it is around 98%

Ten times per day they do this task, a 100% upvote divided on the participants in the open auctions. This is extremely rational and in this way, BidBots preserve the integrity of the Rewardpool instead of more irrational voting habits as we had on STEEM before the bidbots.

BidBots Make sure YOU and the PUBLIC have easy access to SteemPower for YOUR own reasons!

The ones who rape the rewardpool are easy to spot as they have drained their own vote-power down to an almost minimum, so stupid - if you see someone with a very low voting power, tell him/her they are doing it wrong, take a break and vote 10 times per day when your battery is fully charged.

BidBots make sure they stay powered up and benefits those that use them - The BidBot Owners have open communication lines between each other if something needs to be done/changed/talked about, these are fine people who are seriously committed to their investors, the users and the rewardpool. Be sure of it!

BidBots are monitored by their owners + competitors + everybody to preserve the integrity of the Rewardpool!

Nobody wants to destroy the rewardpool, serious steemians know this, and bidbot owners and operators are for the most part the absolutely most serious people you can ever come across when it comes to integrity in the monetary sense. In other words, nobody wants to shit in the swimming pool we all swim in, and there is no point in emptying the pool when there is a fresh stream of new rewards coming in with every block.

Kvinabadet-interior.jpg

The Rewardpool is full - Have a swim!

In essence, right now let us say you spend $50 divided between 5 bidbots, you get $49 worth of upvotes, so your marketing cost is really just $1. The alternative would be to not have access to this steempower and instead, you would just sit there watching whales, dolphins, and minnows circle jerking like before, and we do not want that.

Another thing about trending on STEEM is that your posts trend relatively high in search engines on the topics you write or make videos/songs/photos/game about. And of course you make more followers when people actually see your post, which is something to think about with 50,000-100,000 posts/comments per day and growing.

You were BORN TO STAND OUT - so why the hell do you TRY TO FIT IN?

The fact our company stay invested with STEEM is because of all the crap content around here, which in investor terms are great because that means there is room to grow, which is awesome for us. It is the same reason we dumped Alphabet and Facebook, they have sold themselves into a synthetic political correct perfection which yields a lot of frustration of not being seen, or being seen by so few that you have almost no social impact. You know about all of this, so be happy that BidBots allow you to reach out to the MASSES for YOUR OWN REASONS!

riad-yasmine-marrakech-patio-vue.jpg

Every year, smarter and smarter people grow smarter on the STEEM blockchain, people use their talents, their time, their money and build up their very own STEEM BRANDS, all which will be very very valuable in the future as we keep growing on the MEAN. Around here you got to be a little crazy sometimes to shake the tree and make sure it is founded on solid ground so it won't fall over and die when it grows up and yield fruits.

I hope you learned what you need to know about BidBots, now CLIMB TO THE TOP and become a WINNER!

Oslo-Monolitten-Vigelandsparken.jpg

To learn more about BidBots and see all of them, please go to https://steembottracker.com/ created by @yabapmatt, it will give you a lot of insights on what bots are profitable or not each round in real-time. This is the future of marketing without the use of advertisement.

Thank you, join us on http://STEEMspeak.com for 24/7 voice/text chat about everything STEEM

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
STEEMKR.COM IS SPONSORED BY
ADVERTISEMENT
Sort Order:  trending
  ·  4년 전

I can see both sides of the argument and believe that the whole "problem" (note the air quotes) has more to do with culture and nothing else.

I think if we simply say... "OOohh... its the code, the code is the responsible one for the behavior" we have effectively found a way to deflect any feelings of guilt we may have.

The answer, the solution to this whole thing is somewhere in the middle, but it starts with education and of course creating the right environment for people to learn about how this whole thing works.

There are those who wrongfully believe, that if someone uses bidbots they are effectively draining the reward pool from them. This is quite inaccurate and its equivalent to saying.


"if that whale would not have voted for @overvalueduser he for sure would have voted for me"

The argument is a bit comical to say the least.

I say this and in the same breath say that using excessive bidbots does not magically make you a better writer, a better singer, a better poet. And if anyone solely relies on bidbots to garnish support, they are attempting to live a healthy diet while eating pizza and bacon icecream.

However, we must learn to live and let live. If someone wants to eat pizza and icecream every single day, I should be cognitively consistent to understand their rights and their freedom to do so, in the same way I expect others to respect my choices.

Removing Bidbots from the platform removes also the incentive that whales have to stay powered up and not dump their Steem into the markets. It removes the incentive for investors to even join, because a lot of them don't want to post, don't want to curate and that is more than OK, because of..... "Freedom" - The concept we all seem to almost worship.

Do I think some people abuse the bidbots and send trash into trending? Of course I do, that's why there is a flag button. If its trash, if it sucks, follow your gut and flag it.

Now, to the community leaders who are attempting to teach the minnow how to swim the waters I would only say. Yes, tell them about the pizza, tell about the ice-cream... but make sure they learn about diabetes too, and hopefully they will know how to balance things, if they don't they will also encounter the consequence of their choice.

I'm a little annoyed about this, because it seems like the bidbot conversation became everyone's favorite escape goat.

Oh, I can't get anyone to support me on steem.... it must be the bidbots

Oh, the whales don't notice my work... it must be the bidbots

Oh, I haven't made any friends... it must be the bidbots

Oh, no one listens to my ideas.... it must be the bidbots.

When does that end?

Sorry for the rant...

·

"Oh, I can't get anyone to support me on steem.... it must be the bidbots

Oh, the whales don't notice my work... it must be the bidbots

Oh, I haven't made any friends... it must be the bidbots

Oh, no one listens to my ideas.... it must be the bidbots."

Haha. I love your middle ground approach.
But the fact of the matter is that if bot delegation reaches higher percentages, 70%, 80%, 90% (and it seems to go in that direction) who exactly will there be to support you?
Its not a matter of: "i deserve it more then the other guy"..
It will be: "neither me or the other guy can get any kind of support".

Bots are not the scapegoat. They are truly the biggest problem of Steem atm. Not because they are evil in their concept, its because of what they lead to through action of individuals that delegate to bots and who use them.
Freedom absolute is not good for any of us. Even for those that support it. Im all for the EOS constitution Dan implemented. We need a consensus type rule book here as well.

·
·
  ·  4년 전

I'm not disagreeing with you Silent, not really... but the problem is not "the evil whales". I guess I would accept the idea of "the evil whales" more if I saw no dolphin or minnow delegating to bots and participating of the bid-bot buying too.

This reminds me a bit of how prohibition "worked". If we have a culture that wants it, then we can't effectively ban it, not really, we just create black markets for it.

Delusion Examples.-
"Yes, the solution to people smoking pot is that we make pot illegal and they will stop smoking the devils lettuce for sure"

"Yes, the solution to drunk driving is that we put them in jail if we catch them, and then nobody is ever going to drive drunk ever again"

Hence my approach on changing the culture, because unless the constituency is more educated on the subject, unless they understand balance, they will keep on working against their own self interest, due to a myopic short term mentality.

When you say Freedom Absolute is not good for us, maybe what you mean is the blurry lines (at times) where my freedom ends and someone else's rights start. Which is to say, in the name of freedom, of self governance, I can't go to your house unannounced and eat everything in your fridge for example. Everyone would agree 100% with that statement, but if I felt compelled, entitled, within my rights to go to your house and eat all your food, the problem is with my mental state, my social ineptness, my failure to recognize the harm I'm causing... and not the fridge, not the food you left in there, and sure enough not the door that was easy to take down.

Hence my focus on educating the "young". the new users that come to the platform. We can't eliminate 100% abuse, because there will always be people that will feel entitled to break into your home and eat out of your fridge, but if enough people see that act as fringe, as the wrong behavior, then we can effectively create a cultural norm, or an equivalent of that in this platform.

Granted my example is ridiculous, but I'm attempting to make my point as clear as I can.

ps.- no food from any fridge has currently been stolen.

·
·
·

Ahhhh. Yes exactly. Your freedom to smoke ends at my nose.
The difference between some of the freedoms you mentioned, pot for example doesnt apply here since its actually beneficial to legalize it.
Bots on other hand arent weed, theyre more like drunk driving.
And no, you cant ban all actions that have an ill effect on society, but you can regulate them.
People will always vote sell, but even if that vote selling can be cut drastically by making it inconvinient you have done good.
You make the cost of participating in those actions cost more then the actual benefit by increasing the risk.

And no, its not only whales. But 80% of SP is in whale hands. Theyre delegation is what fuels the machine.

I just dont think people will realize this ever. Most know its hurting steem but they have no power to change it so they join in. Some of them anyways

·

Do I think some people abuse the bidbots and send trash into trending? Of course I do, that's why there is a flag button. If its trash, if it sucks, follow your gut and flag it.

bots run blacklists and subsystems checking for different signals. Abusers often get... abused in the end, humans make sure things eventually self correct.

I'm a little annoyed about this, because it seems like the bidbot conversation became everyone's favorite escape goat.

That is why I wrote this article, point for point as educational material because I too am tired of the yammering rep 43 accounts screaming bidbots this and bidbots that. @Booster will be 1 year old in 10 days, being the first bidbot of course we have seen "it all", and made a ton of changes along the way.

I am sure the bot abusers hate us for it, but well - they have had their golden era. More and more serious content creators outbid them now, and we see a better culture forming.

·

Applause! What right does someone have to tell a stakeholder what to do with their stake? (none)
How dare someone decide who can purchase a product that is for sale?
The product is the Voting Power which is derived from the stake.

The answer to shit posters is to break out your flag.

·
·

It was a very wise choice of yours not to debate me if you believe - on any level whatsoever - that any three of those points have any legitimacy in this context.

I don't think you need me to tell you why they are entirely nonsensical, but for any readers who are buying this bullshit, allow me to briefly explain;

Applause! What right does someone have to tell a stakeholder what to do with their stake? (none)

If @ned posted speaking of his desire to use steem funds to hire assassins to murder every first born child in the city of shanghai- would you feel that you have the right to object to that?

You should, because what he would be attempting to use his stake for is immoral and has adverse consequences for many. As does vote selling.

How dare someone decide who can purchase a product that is for sale?

If someone tried to sell you a recently snatched toddler, who the fuck are you to dare decide whether that person should be able to sell that child or not?

The product is the Voting Power which is derived from the stake.

No. The product is the stake(and also the content). The voting power is a function of the stake, and therefore it is simply a use of the product. Just as murder is one potential (but not ideal) use of a gun (product) so too is the selling of votes an adverse use of the stake (product).

To any who are still not clear on this. The daily reward pool (not voting power) is what is really the issue here. The reward pool is - funnily enough - for distributing rewards. Are rewards something that you sell? No. That would be a purchase. Therefore, the reward pool is for rewarding.

The voting power in this example works as the fruit of the trees does. It is a finite - yet self perpetuating - resource, that was intended for those in the world to use as sustenance. In terms of Steemit, it was intended to reward both the best content creators, and the best curators, to keep them coming back.

The trees, however, have now been seized, and now the fruit that everyone was using to sustain their selves is for sale. The reward pool is being auctioned off, and there's no selling that as acceptable from my perspective. Not after reading some of the pro-bidbot arguments on this post. I realise now that you're all either lying very blatantly to everyone else, or lying unwittingly to yourselves.

To anyone reading this who has been on Steemit for a while and made 10,000+ STEEM, and haven't had to sell any of it to survive, so you still have it all, and can sell it when steem goes to $100... Let me ask you something;

How much fucking money do you have to earn before you can afford to buy a spine? You have made plenty. You can't have it stolen from you now. A flag doesn't impact your wallet. So why the fuck do you still have your tongue up someone's arse when you've got more than enough money to live on your feet? Seriously, think about what the fuck you are doing. They might have gammafied the site in order to pit us against one another, but this is not a fucking game, and the "losers" in this very real situation, they starve. So perhaps we ought to start trying to be on the same fucking team.

·
·
·

That is the strangest invite to a team I have ever received.

First, I have received about 9 or 10 votes from Fyrst after nearly 2 years of hanging on in SteemSpeak and I assure you my tongue is not near anyone's ass. :) lol.

Now that we are clear on that...

If Ned made a post about killing someone, if I took it seriously I would call the authorities.

I would not buy a toddler.

As for the rest of your opinion on what and how the economics work out it is an experiment and I want to see us attract investors. I stand by my view that if investors come it will not be for the content or a perfectly functioning reward system. It will be for the tech, the traffic or the crypto. There are hundreds of sites that people can share their writing. Most of them do not have investors.

When I trade with someone in cash or in crypto their financial status has nothing to do with the deal.

The deal is about a product if I buy milk, I do not pay based on the financial status of the seller, I pay based on the price of milk.

I'm not sure what my financial status has to do with anything or what brings on the personal attack portion of your comment.

You have no idea what it has or hasn't cost me to keep my stake powered up.

·
·
·
·

I have just read my own reply before reading yours in order to refresh my memory of what's been said here so far. I should say that the tone of my comment could have been improved upon, but in truth I did not expect a response, and so I didn't think to make the effort to uphold myself in the manner in which I typically would when debating a serious issue.

With that said, it does seem as though you have misinterpreted the overwhelming majority of my comment, for as I said, I didn't expect a response from you, and so my comment was for those who I expected to read it, not for you.

I don't know what your relationship with fyrstikken is, nor do I consider it relevant in this context. If that was in response to the bold comment at the end, again that was not aimed directly at you. That was a comment to those dolphins who have already made a lot for keeping their mouths shut on the abuse we all know they've witnessed, for I believe it is time for some influential members of the community to start speaking out against abusers instead of continuously advocating for their increasingly despicable behaviour by remaining silent. But again, this was merely an opportunity I seized to say something that's been on my mind. It's not tied specifically to vote-selling and so if you want to speak on the comment in bold at the end, then we can discuss that in a separate thread.

But for now, let me address the points that I do feel matter.

If Ned made a post about killing someone, if I took it seriously I would call the authorities.

Though you haven't said it in this sentence, I am going to presume that you mean "with Steemit funds" as that is the question that was posed. It sounds to me that you then already agree with me that if someone wants to use their stake for illicit purposes, then others have not only the right but the obligation to intervene.

I would not buy a toddler.

This doesn't really answer the inferred question. I used a child as an extreme example to make the point that because something is for sale does not mean it ought to be. Is this something you would also agree with?

As for the rest of your opinion on what and how the economics work out it is an experiment and I want to see us attract investors. I stand by my view that if investors come it will not be for the content or a perfectly functioning reward system. It will be for the tech, the traffic or the crypto. There are hundreds of sites that people can share their writing. Most of them do not have investors.

It is an experiment indeed, for we've been told that they're attempting to try something new here. If we are going to do everything exactly the same as it is done in the world beyond the blockchain; then why refer to it as an experiment at all?

I would argue that attracting investors ought not to be a priority. There is enough value in this ecosystem already. But, to better respond to this point I will pretend for a moment that I do think attracting investors ought to be a priority right now. If that's the case, then the type of investors we attract is of the utmost importance, for they are typically going to be more influential than the thousands of minnows who simply sign up and attempt to earn their stakes.

If you create an environment where vote-selling is an acceptable practice, then you are going to draw in investors who are comfortable with that. This means that if a lot of the most powerful members of the STEEM ecosystem are making the bulk of their profits through the selling of votes, then Steemit and STEEM will evolve in such a way as to accommodate and facilitate the practice- rather than evolving around the more appropriate notion of fairness.

If however, we embraced this an experiment, and remembered that the reason we needed this experiment was because the old way was not working very well for most, then we might not so quickly justify abuse by pointing out the window and saying, "look, they've always done this."

It happens in the real world is not a legitimate justification to permit abusive behaviour within an experimental economy that purports itself to be striving for better.

One seriously needs to consider the mindset of a whale who would sell votes on this platform. We are talking about people who already have so much influence on this platform they could make more than dolphins make through posting simply by upvoting content. Curation rewards exist after all to incentivize fair voting.

But these whales are willing to continue cashing in on the curation rewards they are paid to make sure that all deserving get to eat, and are now getting the poorest of us to send them money just for an upvote that they're paid to hand out for free anyway?

This is deeply immoral, because one can never know exactly how many mouths will not be fed because of the actions they have taken- very unnecessary actions if you consider the ease of earning more STEEM for whales.

It doesn't take much in the way of reflection to ascertain that this greed comes from a place of fear. We are all humans, and so we need only look inside ourselves to learn why others do the things they do. It is clear to me that whether it be fear of not having enough, fear of looking weaker than other whales, or fear of being less influential and therefore having to rely on their personality, it is most definitely fear that leads to greed.

So do we need people whose entire agendas are dictated by fear to be the most powerful within the community? Where would that get us? - hint; look out the window.

Fear aside, how about the fact that by selling votes, these whales of reversed the distribution of STEEM on the network. It is now being concentrated within the wallets of a few(though they may have many wallets), and so each time any person buys a vote, we are making a member of the community who cares only about their own prosperity- and who is willing to impoverish others to get it - more powerful. That's a dangerous road that leads to future where a few megawhales have complete control over how the reward pool is distributed.

If even that is not enough; then what about the dangers of vote-selling to not just minnows who are unwilling to buy votes- but to every single holder of STEEM. I refer to the obvious truth that this platform became a pyramid scheme the moment we allowed vote-selling to thrive. New users come here and send their money up the ladder to those who already have the most. It should not take a mathematician to see that this leads only to a few unfathomably wealthy people, and countless poor ones. (That is, if it doesn't get brought down like bitconnect in light of this vote selling fiasco)

There are hundreds of sites that people can share their writing. Most of them do not have investors.

As you said, this is not a site like any other. This is an experiment. The supposed purpose of that experiment is to do things better than they were done before - to do things fairer. That was the chief selling point when I joined, and we have done a horrible job of living up to it.

Vote selling perpetuates inequity, and more than that, it makes members of the community who care little about the community, the most powerful ones in the community. Why would anyone want that?

When I trade with someone in cash or in crypto their financial status has nothing to do with the deal.

This is not true. The wealthiest of us always pay the least for things, if they pay at all.

The deal is about a product if I buy milk, I do not pay based on the financial status of the seller, I pay based on the price of milk.

Again, untrue. The financial status of the seller is undoubtedly a primary factor dictating the price of the milk.

But, let's stop talking about milk and trading. This does not matter. Let's stop using the outside world to justify what goes on within this new, experimental ecosystem.

Let's instead just ask a few simple questions;

What is the purpose of curation rewards?

Should whales be receiving them for selling votes?

If we are to get rid of one; curation rewards or vote-selling; which should we get rid of?

  • I hope you don't mind but I'm going to ignore your last two questions because as I explained, they aren't within the context of the debate.
·
·
·
·
·

Haha, Are you going to define the debate as we go!

I appreciate the change in tone and let me back up a bit:

I didn't agree to a debate, in fact, I didn't know what you were referencing at all. Debate class was a long time ago. In addition, I have nothing to prove here.

If you want to discuss bidding bots with me or understand why I feel they are good for the economy, I willing to discuss it with you I would rather do it from seeking a point of understand and maybe some things we can agree on.

Your concern and care for people and the platform shine through and although we have very different ideas on how to get there, I bet we want a lot of the same things.

I bet we also see a lot of things differently. I wonder if our disagreement starts at how we view Steem. I get the impression you see it as a tool to spread wealth to the world and feed the poor.

I don't see it that way, although I totally see that it could have an impact on poverty and that makes me happy.

Let's just have a conversation: If you want to just debate with someone, I saw drpuffnstuff offered and I think he would be great.

·
·
·
·
·
·

Discussion, debate, conversation or otherwise, they're essentially the same thing. A discussion between two people holding different opinions, within a public setting where everyone can see such as this, is a debate. So naturally, your effort to reply to my message and offer points of disagreement, amounts to the acceptance of participation in a debate.

Now, however, rather than respond to the points I addressed, you seem only to want to avoid the discussion you already elected yourself to be a part of when you initially responded.

I don't want to discuss semantics. I want to discuss bidbots. For the sake of complete transparency, so that you might understand my motivations for doing this, I hope to discuss/debate the issue of bidbots and their place on this platform with someone who is both a respected member of the community and who is for bidbots.

My goal in this undertaking is to arrive at one of two outcomes; either one, the other manages to convince me that it is acceptable to use bidbots. Such a philosophy would certainly help me a lot right now if I could get behind it, and so this outcome would most likely improve the quality of my life dramatically. The other potential outcome that I would prefer - given my current position, a result of my current knowledge base and understanding of that knowledge - is that I manage to successfully convince the other in the conversation, and quite publicly for all viewers to see, that vote-selling is entirely immoral and ought to have no place on this platform. This outcome would, I would hope, not only lead to my opponent's switching of positions on this issue, but many of their close followers who might also read the conversation.

You can say you have nothing to prove, but I am not asking you to do that. I have seen you say you care about this community, and so I would like to think that you do not enjoy seeing a huge divide between us that is chipping away at the sense of community that once shined so brightly here. I ask you to have this debate, discussion, or whatever the fuck you would like to call it, not to prove to me that you're not an abuser, or working for abusers. That matters to me not at all. I ask you to have this conversation with me, either publicly or elsewhere as long as it could later be shared, because I want that sense of community returned to this platform, and I can think of no better way to accomplish that than have two Steemit users who have been here long enough to remember the family sentiment that once encapsulated this place, to work out there difference on an issue in a respectable and positive manner.

Essentially, I want to set a better example than bickering to no productive end. If you are pro-Steemit, then you will have to explain to me why you would not want to participate in something like that?

There were some questions posed in your comment, but I care not to answer them until I know that we are having this discussion; because it seems the effort I put into my last comment has been largely ignored by you.

If you are willing to do this, for the sake of the entire community, let me know. And if you are not, let me know that also so I know where you stand.

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Not Interested. I don't feel the need to convince you or anyone else.

I am not interested in being the spokesperson for bidbots. I do acknowledge while they solve some problems they also create other problems.

·
·
·
·
  ·  4년 전

As for the rest of your opinion on what and how the economics work out it is an experiment and I want to see us attract investors.

It's neither opinion nor about how economics work out, whatever that nonsensical assertion was meant to say. He was talking about the function of the reward pool being turned on its head and being no longer a Reward pool but a product.

What's the experiment? The one without any control or hypothesis and the one that nobody knows anything about, the nameless experiment of "attracting investors"? Is this a multilevel marketing scam? Did you end up here simply to make money regardless of why and what the function you condone abuses what it was created for? Wait, I'm attempting to drag the conversation back into the realm of what money cannot buy, or a community, let's discuss what will get us to the moon for a moment before the bubble bursts and people are left in ruin because you think people throwing money at the system is the reason we're all here. Heck Steem was created to get investors.

I stand by my view that if investors come it will not be for the content or a perfectly functioning reward system. It will be for the tech, the traffic or the crypto.

So the tech doesn't include content or a properly functioning system, rewards and all and you're OK with people speculating with Steem, because crypto. Because Steem is for investors.

There are hundreds of sites that people can share their writing. Most of them do not have investors.

Ergo Steem was created for investment. Brilliant deduction, the grand nameless experiment provides.

As for the accusations that you were attacked, you deserve an apology, or it simply befuddles you that your financial situation might be why you're so vocal about "it's your stake do whatever you want with it" and equally "Steem is for investors, who are looking for a quick pump or "tech" and here's another less vacuous label that conveniently is wide open to interpretation to mean anything and everything CRYPTO" yet we were talking about the lack of a functional curation (promotion? **Hell yeah, it's your stake, hashtag-voturbation for life) system and soon enough we are going to discuss a functional moderation system that's both decentralized and redundant proof, or STABLE and SENSIBLY IMPLEMENTED.
The attack you perceive now will be far less interpretive than now, and we will have a way to put your mouth up to the light of scrutiny next time you try to spread Bullshit, ain't anyone wasting their votes, they will stake their very name, account and stake behind that Bullshit and the cost will be so big that a mass exodus will take place and from that day forward we will forget all this circular motion "adjusting" what we know won't work, instead of allowing for you and your accusations of attack to have a redress as simple as a button that actually flags and isn't only a downvote to those that know what's at stake.

·
·
·
·
·

I'm speechless. To hold a different view from yours is obviously a moral deficit, in your opinion.

got it.

·
·
·
·
·
·
  ·  4년 전

Where the fuck did you pull that from? You are so victimized by me telling you about moderation and how you ought to not be so befuddled where before I mentioned that Steem ain't about investors and that was after I attempted to bring you to talk about the reward pool, which you obviously had no interest in discussing while serendipity you want to hint yet again that basing my judgement of your utter lack on moral constitution by the numerous implications or outright telling lack of concern "it's your stake you can do whatever you want with it" and proud support of abusive behavior, is simply "to hold a different view from me", while you can ignore the substance of what I said and instead focus on the hairs I've raised as I spoke in sarcasm of certain behaviors, which on their own accord make the judgement about you, not simply because I say so or simply because it's a different opinion.

The point was that the reward pool isn't a product to be sold, that the experiment you think is happening ain't got shit for it to be an experiment, that the point ain't for crypto or tech, or any other vacuous nonsense but all about curation, content and rewards, (things you outright dismissed) and that even with the proposed changes, moderation is coming, you can have your multilevel marketing scam, I'm taking content and Curation and the aspect of rewarding both, and you can mumble on "it's your stake do whatever you want with it" amidst the voturbation that remains, because investors come for content and FUNCTION-AL Premise while speculators come for the CRYPTO, and in my opinion the more we distance from them the better, but you, you can be speechless because you think I form my judgement on your moral deficiency on simply difference of opinion, good one, it's as if you gave a fuck about discussing shit.

·
·
·
·

I will read and respond to this tomorrow because it's 2:21AM and I am about to go sleep.

·
·
·
·
·

That's fair

·
·
·

To any who are still not clear on this. The daily reward pool (not voting power) is what is really the issue here. The reward pool is - funnily enough - for distributing rewards. Are rewards something that you sell? No. That would be a purchase. Therefore, the reward pool is for rewarding.

That pretty much sums it up. Certain people have repurposed the reward pool to enrich themselves instead of rewarding others for contributing. That is what it is but they often use the irredeemably flawed analogy as if vote selling were merely a means of promotion or advertisement.

If it really were about advertisement, I have a recommendation to any vote buyer (this came to mind thanks to @freebornangel). It's quite simple.

Decline rewards.

·
·
·
  ·  4년 전

Im here to tell you that whatsup had no problem defending abusive flagging and abusive self voting htooms which when he first came on the scene was posting on a strange correlation, when Fyrst would be on the network commenting, resteeming and voting htooms would be off, but when htooms would be commenting, resteeming and voting (organically by different percentage votes) Fyrst would be absent, and this was like clockwork for 4 days, not once did their interactions overlap but there were about a dozen cycles of this weird coincidence.

Whatsup has no backbone because things that are toxic for the community such as abuse is simply "the code allows it", it's the equivalent of saying, "it's OK he murdered them, physics allow it".

Go read her opinion post where she accused me of attacking her and she said "I'll say whatever I want" when I told her she can't make up shit about me, and when I confronted her previously about her lack of any interest (care) in discussing the ideas by the dismal presentation she used for them she said that she'll keep doing that disservice, probably because she cares so much.

·
·
·
·

Look, I understand that you and I disagree. I'm just not sure why you are so bothered by my opinion.

Anyway, feel free to comment on all of my posts, while saying nasty things about me.

In all the times we have disagreed, I have never attacked your character or anything about YOU at all. I just disagree with your view.

·
·
·
·
·
  ·  4년 전

I don't care for your approval of what I can and can't say about you, I'm not making shit up like you did and if it's not true don't know why you're calling it nasty instead, other than to say it's not true in a backhanded way, because you know what nasty things are? what you advocated, and that's fucking nasty indeed.

You don't have to bother with why I'm so bothered by your opinions, it's gonna make your head hurts, trying to actually form a spine to prop your head onto so you can hold the vantage that I see, you're welcome to be sure of it though anytime, simply start making correct judgements and holding an integrity in that, maybe then you'll actually start putting two seconds of consideration behind what you right now respond to as "you're attacking me", maybe you can then think clearly enough to defend your ideas with integrity, and don't fall back onto "it's my opinion " as if I or anyone have to respect opinions that are neither morally right nor logically consistent, or would you rather I encourage people in such wrongs, not to make your head hurt.

·
·
·
·
·
  ·  4년 전

"too full of anger, and personal attacks " v2 :

I have never attacked your character or anything about YOU at all.

·
·
·

The reward pool is being auctioned off by the people who actually have the large stake in the network, whether its their own stake or they convinced others to DELEGATE them their stake, it is the stake holder decision to do what they want. If you disagree with how a stake holder is controlling the reward pool distribution (selling upvotes) you can flag all of the posts they are distributing rewards to and put it back in the reward pool. If you don't have enough SP to put a dent in and you really care, either acquire more SP or convince others to DELEGATE you theirs.

·
·
·
·

If someone made a post on Steemit tomorrow stating that they were looking for the funds needed to buy a gun so that they could shoot up a school. And if that post was upvoted by the steemit inc account, would you have a problem with this?

I would have a problem with it, and that's why I have a problem with this too. They are both immoral and could quite potentially result in the loss of life.

I believe I once put it this way;

Buying a vote from a bidbot is like paying for your rapist's penis enlargement surgery. With every purchase they get more powerful, and can fuck you that much harder, that much easier.

We are making people who have no regard for creators in the community the most influential people in the community.

As I said to someone a moment ago; they advertised this place as somewhere you could earn money through creating content, not somewhere where you could pay someone to give you money. Do you not see the entire content aspect of the platform has been rendedered redundant by these bots????????????????????????????????????

·
·
·
·
·

lol ok son of satire, that extreme case just furthers my point that theres a solution to all of your problems. To answer your question: "if that post was upvoted by the steemit inc account, would you have a problem with this?" No I do not have any problem with this, I think they could probably get a gun either way. But if YOU have a problem with it, then you can either power up SP and downvote Steemit INC to stop his flow of "funds" or you could just get a higher power involved like your government.
Your second question: "Do you not see the entire content aspect of the platform has been rendedered redundant by these bots?"
When you say platform do you mean Steemit.com or the Steem blockchain? I already told you that it's up to YOU and the community to do something about it by programming your own app that doesn't put bid-bot-upvoted posts in Hot and Trending. Make your own app that has its own search algorithm and interface. You don't have to do it alone or with your own funds, you can make posts about it ask for programming help and for funding.
Let me know if you need help with anything.

·
·
·
·
·
·

No your idea is futile because the negative effects of vote-selling will effect the entirety of the STEEM network, not just Steemit, so making an dApp on STEEM will not help.

I would like to know what you think about curation rewards. They were stated to have been about encouraging fair voting to ensure the best content creators and curators got the best rewards. So do you believe that these vote-selling whales should be receiving curation rewards for selling votes and impoverishing a vast proportion of the community? A proprtion that will only increase with each purchased vote, as the necessity to rely on bidbots is perpetuated by their use? That's worthy of rewarding in the supposed spirit of fair curation that is targeted at quality content??

And I want to reiterate a point that you do not seem to have understood. At one point, the best way to make money on Steemit was to post good content (or choke on a mobydick). But now, the best way to make money on Steemit - and nearing the only way - is to buy your upvotes. So, it doesn;t take a lot of foresight to see that as the importance moves away from content creation, and simply paying for votes becomes tolerated by all, then Steemit will be forced to go under some radical changes, evolving into something completely different from a content creation platform, because it isn't content that is being rewarded anymore, it's customers that are.

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

That isn't my idea, its the actual design of the blockchain. You are literally trying to control people and tell them what to do in comment section instead of just using the blockchain the way it was designed. Steemit.com is just a beta window to the Steem blockchain, it was expected of the users to make a better site by now. Programing your own app sure does a hell of a lot more toward correct the problem compared to you complaining on everyone comment section making them dislike you. You waste so much time, I didn't even read what you wrote this time around because you are just trying to argue a point and complain instead of working on your problems. I hope this habit doesn't carry over into other aspects of your life.

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

BTW your idea that the two ways to make money on Steemit are to post good content or to pay for upvotes just furthers my point that the people who complain about bid bots are the people who are stuck on a very shallow social media way of thinking when in reality you are using a blockchain system, the people who reap the highest reward are people who program applications that add value to the blockhain, not people who make written posts or videos. You earn the most on Steemit by adding value, shit content doesn't add value, neither do bid bots. Programming your own applications on Steemit add value and will be rewarded whether its through delegation or taxing a percentage for usage like Dtube.
At the end of the day, u are literally looking at this so shallow and complaining while everyone else thats getting on board with how Steemit system works is earning much more than you. You don't have to buy upvotes and u don't even have to post good content, u just have to know how to work the system.

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

2.PNG
Yea it's pretty much pointless to try to help you with your problems when you are so locked into your beliefs. All you are trying to do is debate a point. I'm not even arguing for bid bots, I'm literally telling you how Steemit was programmed to correct these problems and you reply with " your idea is futile" like lol bruh im not trying to argue a point or come up with some new idea, this is literally how the site was made that u are using right now. I'm literally teaching u how something works and u are saying " no but bid bots are bad tho" yea i don't give a fuck whether they are good or bad. I do not give a fuck about bid bots, I am trying to teach you how to correct your problems and become wealthy while fixing a community.

·
·
  ·  4년 전

The answer to shit posters is to break out your flag.

Someone put that in the FAQ somewhere.

·
·

I posted some posts not on this subject!!
I hope you take a few minutes to look at them.

·
·

Huge problem on Steem is that people are too afraid to use the flag. It is a very sadly underutilised resource

·
·
·

There is a huge retaliation culture keeping people from doing just that. People feel attacked by even the smallest downvote.

Have a look at the responses I got when I was testing out a micro-downvote bot setup that aimed to attenuated vote-bot powered self-upvotes.

It's a shame there is no downvote function for upvotes, as I feel that may be perceived as less of a direct attack. That is, I'm not interested in downvoting someone's post, most of the time, but I just want to attenuate a silly upvote on that post.

Let's say I feel @fyrstikken wrote a shit post just here that added nothing to the value of this platform, I might want to attenuate @upme's upvote with a bit of a downvote. If the platform was just stake based, I would be able to do that. Unfortunately, though, it is more stake-based-fear based at this moment. I have no option to attenuate an upvote, so my downvote that is too small to hurt @fyrstikken's reputation in any way would likely end up being retaliated against using a downvote thet WILL cut deep into MY reputation.

I think the platform IMHO desperately needs a cure for the fear installed by the power of high stake individuals (most notably bidbot owners) to retaliate downvoters into negative reputation.

Bidbot proponents like to bring up stake based democracy, but guess what, it is a fear-of-stake based oligarchy instead. Noone dares to structurally attenuate bidbot votes if their view of the steemit ecconomy makes them believe bidbots hurt platform value.

Now, with one way to downvote, noone can really blame anyone for disproportionate retaliation. But if there was a way to destinguish attenuating downvotes against an upvote from 'could cut into reputation' downvotes, there might be a culture change where it would be considered uncool to destroy reputation in retaliation for a purely attenuative downvote of a disproportionate upvote.

·
·
·
·

A Plutocracy with trickle down economics. Would be my term to describe it.

And those fail always.

·
·
·

What if we had bandwidth flagging to stop spammers and this will stop people from being able to use all the freakin bandwidth but only have like 7 SP! Its crazy we must fix bandwidth! We can rent out bandwitdh we don't need with delegation and we need to think about constructing a better smarter steem blockchain for the future maybe even adding rudimentary smart contracts

·
·

No one is telling anyone what to do with their stake. What critics are doing is pointing out the effect they think delegating to bots in such a high percentage will have on the platform and is having right now.
You may think bots are doing a great thing to Steem, others do not agree. Those that do not agree are in majority number and minority in stake.
Its basically a futility crusade at this point since none of us critics can do anything about it but get a flag here and there for speaking up and watch Steem crumble in the silence of our gray blog page.

·
·
·
  ·  4년 전

You may think bots are doing a great thing to Steem, others do not agree. Those that do not agree are in majority number and minority in stake.

I often wonder if this is true. I'm serious too, I wonder if we could effectively run a poll and find out.

·
·
·
·

I find it that it is true based on my limited interaction with the community. Thats ofc not a fool proof position but anything going forward would need to be consensus based.
A vote. 1account/1vote...
And not a plutoratic vote. Plutocracy is a failed system that should be recreated here if we want to sustaun steem for a long time.

·
·
·
·
·

I don't think you understand the system. The blockchain is programmed to be a stake based system. There is no such thing as 1 person one vote here. You can talk about it, but it will never happen.

It could also be easily gamed, if you remember when Haejin joined he brought a bunch of level 25 minnow accounts on board that didn't power up, but rather ran around and trolled. Surely you wouldn't want that type of person having equal stake and voice as those of us who might disagree, but are committed to the site and the community.

·
·
·
·
·
·

I think i completely understand the system. Me not agreeing with it is another thing entirely.
SMTs will bring 1account/1vote. Thats exactly what Ned said. It will be a hybrid system at first, which i completely support but SMTs are a shift in the general philosophy.

The bot accounts are a problem of course, but with reputation, age of account, plagiarism detection, in place we do not need to base 1account/1vote on the bare bones account existence. Its a matter of logistics at that point.

What i see now is a system of Plutocracy and trickle down economics that has been shown to lead to complete failure.
That system is imo in place here. That will not lead to any good in the middle or long term.

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

One account, one vote, does not change stakebased. (dPOS.)

It just slows down the phony accounts for scamming and spamming if it does anything at all.

Those who own stake in the system will always be able to use their stake to sway the system. That is the beauty of the system. Those who have the most invested have the most to win/lose and thus get to have the most influence. Just as buying one stock in Apple doesn't put you on the board of directors. Neither does being a content creator on SteemIt. Anyway, thanks for the conversation.

·
·
·
·
·
·

You have that right, especially considering he's not the one doing it.

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Consider this, does anyone not get a payout because the reward pool was raped by someone else? Is there ever no SBD left?

·
·
·
·
·
·
  ·  4년 전

It will never happen, you mean that when Dan said that they were working on a moderation system apart from Curation that didn't resonate with one vote per person or you think moderation (justice) was going to be free market stake based implementation with the biggest wallets having a bigger say in moderation?

You're about as committed to the site as your incessant defense for people doing whatever they want with their stake, as you did when you attempted to defend htooms for Self Voting and equally their malicious flagging of fulltimegeek. You are about as concerned with community as when you told me to my face that you'll do whatever you want to marginalize and attack ideas, especially lying and playing the victim or simply spreading your toxic opinion which was based on outright lies and fabrication. Your a fake, a impostor, a complete 180 of what stands as integrity.

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

baah baah....humbug

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Lies and fabrications? Oh, please do tell...

·
·
·
·

if you belong to any community, test the poll there ;)

·
·
·
·
·
  ·  4년 전

I probably could, but the sample is too small... I know you can't really specify exactly what the right sample size would be in order to eliminate as much error as possible from the results, but at the same time, it might be accurate to do a poll with at least a 10% of the active accounts to get a solid idea.

·
·
·
·
·
·

any trial at all. better than nothing. For any other person reading this, using my own experience i will repeat it here: nigerian accounts are all over steemit, but nigerians are not. Let any nigerian that reads this dispute it.

·
·
·

I don't think bid bots are doing a great thing for Steem but without them this platform would be dead. The problem is not the bid bots, it is the uneven distribution of Steem Power, 95% of the votes on this platform have very little or no monetary value whatsoever.

Bid bots and paid delegation keep the investment going in this platform and attract future investment, this investment needs a return. Give it 3 to 4 years when there will be many more accounts with 1000+ SP then I think the system will begin to right itself, I do think bid bots will be needed during this transition period to achieve this. We also need someone famous to come on to Steem, then we need to support them fully. I agree with @whatsup in that most accounts with investment are unlikely to participate in voting and curation.

If bid bot usage allows accounts to grow and redistribute SP, by actively engaging in voting and curating, then this is one way of using that delegated SP for the organic growth of Steem that otherwise would not happen.

So my belief is that if delegating and vote buying was removed the vast majority of the SP holdings from those that delegate would be removed from the platform and the Steem price would plummet, leading to the decline in Steem. At least this delegation and vote buying allows others to utilise this SP for the good of Steemit.

·
·
·
·

I understand your position but i obviously disagree.
Like Fyrst said. Bots live of the Crap content economy.. They earn from it and they encourage it because its good for business.

Im positive those that hold the most SP would not leave the platform if bots werent a thing. They were here long before that. Steem offers other investment opportunities. Consider Meerkat and Hendrikdegrote.
Their support of Curie for example does earn them a nice return on investment without them having to lift a finger. If they did try to flee they would create a cascade and the price would plummet hurting them as well.
Rarely any platform offers additional investment opportunity outside price speculation like steem does. Nah theyre not stupid.

If this does continue for 2 or 3 years, which hopefully will not be the case, you will have a large contingent of bloggers that grew their blog through bots. Those blogs will receive no following what so ever. That can be seen right now. The interaction rate on the posts from those that bot frequently, without boting is close to zero. Its all artificial, non-organic.
What they are doing for themselves, in the long run is absolutely worthless.
If they couldnt attract any following or interest without bots then once they stop boting not a single thing will change.

Consider Yallapapi, who is a decent writer. He threw thousand of SBD at bots. How many people do you think read anything he writes when he doesnt use bots? He might as well be a rating 25 newbie on Steem.

What bots do create is the idea that Steem is a crap content economy and that does hurt investment. Investors arent crazy. When they see a platform that failed at its core idea they will not come here. Powering down takes time and locking your SP in a platform thats seen as a failure in its ability to fulfill its goal is a super risky business decision.

And that is the consensus when an outsider looks at whats trending. There is no escaping that.
Not a single good thing will come from bots. Not for you or me or the bot owners. In the long run if the "shit content economy" persists we all get hurt.

Thats why im asking: "What happens if bot delegation reaches 80%-90%?
The new quality creators will all leave. Every single one of them.
The quality atm is hidden in the lower levels of the trending pages, but with higher Bot delegation that will be completely wiped out.
Those are the people that bring value to the platform. Those that have the ability to create interest in their content.

·
·
·
·
·

Its rather looking what bots do to the price of steem vs what you gain from delegating to bots.

·
·
·
·
·

I don't hold with the quality argument, I think that's a red herring, on two counts, whilst I agree crap content can be promoted, the down vote flag is there if you need it. First count, as others have pointed out there wasn't much quality before bid bots anyway and secondly, look at that what trends on You Tube by popular likes, is that quality content, I think not.

You misunderstood my point about the two to three years, it was not about if those accounts were worthy to stand on their own two feet without buying votes but if by the process of using bots enough SP is distributed to allow any of the so called quality content providers to make it on this platform, my argument is that bid bots are providing that mechanism.

If you can come up with an alternative solution to distribute SP more evenly so voting by anyone can provide an incentive for quality to be more prevalent on the platform then I would welcome it with open arms.

How has Steemit failed? I find that bizarre, the idea was rather than the model we have at the moment where you produce content on Facebook for instance and Facebook get all of the rewards, instead you are rewarded for that content. But there was nothing in there about that content being good or of value, I would imagine most of all of the stuff on Facebook is pretty drab or crap in most peoples opinion.

Early investors were here on speculation, this coin is being used and investors can gain returns via delegation, taking away delegation payments would have a HUGE effect on the platform, this is proof of work, unfortunately not everyone has the time or inclination to do that work. Yes there will be those investors that believe in steem and would stay, but I firmly believe it would decline heavily.

Steemit is going to be the mother of crap content, that is because 95% of what humans produce is crap, there is no way to avoid that fact and no way to produce a system that could embrace everyone and eliminate crap. There is too much energy and time wasted fighting it and debating it, it is best just ignored.

As a big investor to Steemit I care not for that crap content or the crap accounts, let them grow and increase SP, what I want is those accounts to engage, vote and use Steem, it is from those actions in which quality content will eventually win out and prosper.

·
·
·
·
·
·

Yes. Facebook does take everything. But even on your point on flagging there is really not much you can do. Your flag is completely inneficient since you arent really flagging againts the creator. You flag againts millions of bot SP. Its like throwing pebbles at a tank.

Quality and value is the point. Steem wins or fails on that account. Growth of the platform depends on 2 things.

  1. Atracting users
  2. Ability to earn.

If bots get all the SP. You cannot expect growth.
If users cannot earn rewards (and majority of new users will almost never buy SBD to pay for bots)and the platform cannot increase its user base growth goes out the window.

I wouldnt say 95% create crap but a lot do. But its not about only content, its about interactions and value you bring.

But if those 5% get to trending and grow. Those 5% that are wuality creators then we all benefit.
The outside reputation of steem rises and content is consumed more.
How can the quality win over if it cannot be seen. Everyone thinks theyre amazing but only through consensus can that really ever be established.
If bots dominate no consensus can exist.

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

95% was a bit of an over statement, I think just say the majority is crap, but then crap and quality for that matter is subjective.

I take your point on flagging, but that is the same argument again, no SP no influence.

No, I completely disagree, which is where I think the main crux of the argument is, you think that a small majority of quality providers benefit us all, where I think we need to get SP distributed out and in to the hands of the users who can use it and help the system grow. The truth is we need both, but I would say 80% for SP distribution and 20% for quality providers, mainly because I believe the quality providers will come in time.

I again disagree that consensus (on its own) gets you where you want to be. Also I think you need to look bigger than whats going on now, look at trending and what the really highest payment is, around $1000 ish, thats the best you can get for paying for it, when quality content comes on this platform you are going to be blown away by the earnings if this is a success, paid for content wouldn't even touch it. But it won't all be great content, a lot of crap will get huge rewards as well.

But, and its a big but, people need the voting power to do it, for us to see quality posts make 10,000 and even perhaps 100,000 or more, the vast majority need SP not the few that have it now.

So there are two ways to look at your problem, eliminate the crap content out so the good content hits trending, bad, very bad or

Enable the good content to be above all the crap by getting it rewarded far greater than buying votes can, good, very good.

I am trying to achieve it via the latter. They both achieve the same thing but the latter allows for SP distribution.

I agree on it not just being about content, interaction is key as well.

Oh and on the subject of the visibility and trending page, I think it should be changed so that no vote paid posts get into trending.

·
·
·

lol, such drama. :) Which tools did you use to calculate the majority?

Nothing is crumbling.

But you do make a good point about sharing a view. Best of luck.

·
·
·
·

Haha. Take bot delegation to higher percentages and see what happens. We will get there very soon. . Wanna run a poll? How about a referendum?😉

·
·
·
·
·

I don't know what the majority thinks, there are a lot of people silent on the issue. Never confuse the loudest for the majority.

·
·
·
·
·
·

Ofc i dont. Because im one of the loud minnows. People are scared. Id like to see general opinion. People come to me like im crazy for writing this stuff. Theyll agree, clap, but never stand in my defence. They dont want trouble.
If i told you how much ive hurt my payouts for speaking up you would probably not believe me.

People even fear to take away their witness vote when they hear their witness talk about something they completely disagree with.

The loudest are the crazy ones, disliked by those they speak up againts and avoided by those they want to speak for.
But something needs to be said.

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Say whatever you like, but it helps if you can back it up with something.

One of my least fav. part of the site is how personally people take disagreements. leaving this thread, but if you would like to discuss it further find me on discord or comment on one of my posts. Have a good day.

·
·

Obviously anyone can do with their stake what they want. But when stake is only used to make profit and not reward actual content, then steem loses what makes it unique and it will be just another inflationary coin. post

·
·
·

I hear you and I don't know whether or not that will happen.
Let's pretend for a moment you are 100% right.
We still have an easy to use, fast, cheap coin to use with the edition of SMTs and Communities, I am not sure it matters.

What you your thoughts about that?

·
·
·
·

In that case I think it depends a lot on the SMTs that are being developed. There is certainly potential and steem could be just the underlying currency as ethereum is for daps.

Without meaningful SMTs I see no future for steem as we have a lot of fast and cheap currencies already. Take for example bitconnect. Some people argued it would still be okay since it still is a cryptocurrency. But we have enough cryptocurrencies, what we need is innovation.

·
·

I agree, if you don't like when someone used bid bots, just power up a ton of Steem and downvote them if you disagree with the rewards.
It seems most of the people who complain about this are stuck on a social media site with limited control. The Steem blockchain was designed to run on an automated system that corrects its own problems, most of the problems have a solution.
-If you think the interface on Steemit is shitty and you think the Trending and Hot pages are broken, you can program your own Decentralized App like Busy.org or Zappl and make your own Trending + Hot algorithm and interface.
-If you think someone shouldn't earn that much or be able to use bid bots, go ahead and downvote but it wont affect their payout much unless you have a large enough stake of the network.

·
·
  ·  4년 전

Applause! What right does someone have to tell a stakeholder what to do with their stake?
(none)

So what is downvoting and upvoting and what do you think Dan had in mind when he said that they were working on a moderation system apart from Curation?

What right? Every right, and some we are patiently waiting for still.

How dare someone decide who can purchase a product that is for sale?

Without thinking twice about it, that's how. Why should they is the real question? Because they don't stand for acts that endanger isolationist positions on a Social Network, voturbation is a product that pollutes and renders the community toxic.

The product is the Voting Power which is derived from the stake.

I'd nuance it more to a service than a product but regardless, the service is abuse of a function, a function that is rendered useless by the abuse.

The answer to shit posters is to break out your flag.

This was never about shit posters, but then again you'll find out what this was about when moderation is the main topic, and the day when all shit people who support isolationist self voting in any of its forms, their sphincters will make the snapping closed sound in global unison.

·

has more to do with culture and nothing else.

everyone is hyped on this "free money" bullshit.

·
·

It IS BS, I've made a lot on here and I've Earned It! Invested a lot too, but I am not so much a "content creator" as providing a maker's space, and support for the newby makers ;)

·

Agreed, truth can be in the middle. I believe in free markets and that the rewards pools cannot be raped but instead just pressed and that is economics 101 in the art of supply and demand. The better ideas rises to the top. People can outnumber bots. But also, bots represent people and their money. I believe in representative republics over democracies which means I do not believe in just a one vote per person thing. I like that the bigger whales have more voting power. And the voting bots is an attempt to compete with the whales with so much voting power. If voting bots drain the rewards, then so do the giant whales. Facebook has bid bots but they are called ads. We live in a world full of competition and that is good.

·

The problem I see with all the bots is that there are some were you send money today and then make the same money back plus some profit and I know people who then just make shit posts to get them boosted and make like 300 SP a week by only boosting.

·

Removing Bidbots

The argument could be made that the price of SBD and Steem are artificially high because whales are not powering down. They are simply delegating to bots, providing no support to the platform, and getting the ROI as people self-curate.

Maybe the Steem ecosystem needs a correction where the price stabilizes and new whales and investors can come into the platform to play a more active role as curators and content creators, and not just sit there collecting rent.

·
·
  ·  4년 전

Maybe you are correct. My main point has been and will be that "code does not fix behavior with absolute accuracy". So when we arrive at the best solution, it has to be simply that... the best solution for the time being.

Demonizing whales is stupid and counter productive to the dialogue we need to be having.

I feel like this argument has been going on forever now and still steemit is running stronger then ever even with tons more bidbots. Wake up people its all a game start playing it ;)

·

The best comment, my friend.

Here, on steembottracker it is clear and obvious that the bots do not agree and steal only money.

The problem with bid bots and any kind of upvote bot has absolutely zero to do with the reward pool. The real problem has to do with the value of the platform eventually boiling down to the value of the content on the platform. Curation, real curation, is essential for driving people to maximize the quality of their content. Fake curation hurts quality and thus hurts the intrinsic long term value of the platform. Users producing mediocre stuff end up with fake reputations what makes things only worse.

The underlying problem though goes deeper than bidbots. Bidbots are just a symptom of a failing platform feature. The promotion feature of the platform, in its current form, doesn't work. With small adjustments the promotion feature could be fixed to both draw in top content creators and to provide promotion users with the proper exposure.

·

As a content creator myself...i cringe a lil when i say this....but the value of the platform is not determined by the value of the content on it. That is only one piece of the pie....and sadly not even close to the biggest. The value of the blockchain is the primary factor in the value of the platform.
There will only be a few of us creators that really last through these pioneer days....it's not until the investors come that real content will come with it.
Take youtube for example....the content on youtube was absolute trash before the investors got on board.
Same goes here....a few here now will make the grade, the rest will come when the money comes.
You have two options as a creator here now.... 1, Dig the fuck in and try to make the cut... 2, Keep getting by for now till the money does come and you reap the benefit by the increase in value of what you earned.
That's all there is buddy.
This is your chance to find out if you can cut the mustard...that's it.
Actually, that goes for the devs too.

·
·

I agree with you. As a content consumer the value of steemit depends on the quality of its content. As a content producer the value of steemit only matters if the rewards depend on quality of content produced. That quality has intrinsic and extrinsic components, or perhaps we might say objective and subjective components. Objective may be the originality of the post, how well content meets a certain information goal, etc. Subjective includes people's interest and feeling of the content, as well as temporal aspects, since some information is quite valuable only at certain times. However, if the economic incentives are such that we can treat content as a black box and the only factors for upvotes and rewards are how much someone can make from that black box, then content quality is irrelevant and the platform suffers, at least as a serious platform for content. It can still however, be a good platform for treating content as tokens, where the value of those tokens are based on factors such as how much power is behind the poster and the groups who will automatically upvote the token. As I learn more about Steemit, I am constantly reminded of my favorite Hayek quote: "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design." (From Hayek's "The Fatal Conceit: The Errors of Socialism")

·
·

Personally, I'm quite happy with what the platform has done for me. My fiction makes slightly more on steemit than it does on all e-book channels combined. Still far from the quitting my day job lever, but that is fine for me. But when I try to convince friend content providers who actually did quit their day job that steemit is a great platform for them to try, there is one major issue keeping them from even trying and that is the inability to turn their following on social media into advertising revenues. You could have a hundred million non-member pageviews on steemit and it wouldn't get you a single cent inadd revenues.

On the flip side, you can pay 20,000 SBD for 'promotion' and all it gets is a place in the promoted tab that nobody looks at ever.

It seems so simple, really. Combine the two as part of the platform. If a non-logged-in user visits a blog through a social media link, show some of the relevant 'promoted' content to that user. Then pay the blogger who brought in the non-member content using some of the money the people promoting their content brought in. That way you lowe the threshold for the professional content creators to join the platform, pull in higher quality content providers and give the people spending money on the promotion feature a bit of bang for their buck.

I think if the platform solves this bit in this or a similar way, the gap that now gets filled by bidbots will disappear and so will the justification for using them as self-upvoting proxy. If I'm correct about this, a facility (bidbots) that curretly has the unintended side effect of decreasing the value of the platform could be replaced using simple means with an improved version of an existing platform facility (promotion) that would end up increasing the intrinsic value of the platform.

Hope I'm making at least a tiny bit of sense here.

·
·
·

I like your idea of of including non-logged-in viewers, though I wonder if that might open the system to gaming from external bots. Still, rewarding authors who bring in new users or viewers in some way would be great. For example, I posted one of my recent steemit blog articles on LinkedIn a few days ago and got 168 views (so far) along with a nice list of where those individuals work. A good number of them most likely clicked on the link and read the post here. In fact, I suspect that more of them read it than Steemit users, even though it is probably of more interest to Steemit users (its a post about a web-based Steem Tag Explorer that I made in Tableau). Perhaps the easiest way to address this issue is to rapidly speed up account creation and simplify the onboarding process. I would have paid to set up an account, but as someone new to the crypto world, I found the pay options confusing. In particular, they did not even list a price to create an account.

·
·
·
·

though I wonder if that might open the system to gaming from external bots.

it will. the Animal Kingdom does not come close to how wild steemit can be. feeding upon feeding.

Wow this one is some house I gotta spend some time in!
That pool itself is enough for me! :D

·

You received a 62.50% upvote from @brotherhood thanks to @mamalikh13!,
join on @brotherhood community on discord channel:https://discord.gg/3HZdaGk and share your post there.
Delegate to Bot and Get High Return Fix 100% earning return,
bidders will always win something and it will adapt to distribute all the 100% upvote ,now we reached to 23000 SP and recommend. send the 0.1 to 0.6 sbd or steem.
Banner-Bid-Bot-Steemit--Grande-3.png

Bidbots are capitalism at her finest. Anyone can use them, and they help users big and small. IF bidbots were draining the rewardpool, those who have the biggest stake would have raised holy hell against them. The only users I have seen that are saying this are smaller accounts that do not use them. I personally only use them on my game posts and one or two good cause posts for the marketing aspect. I am competing just like everyone else is to show off my good content. I do not write bad quality anything, so I want people to see my work any way I can.

let me throw in the good ol' Altruism use for this if chosen to do so, you can use these for others posts you consider are good for the whole platform or need a boost or whatever....
Human Nature is what it is and it with the transparency of Steem, we the stakeholders can readily see how people use their own funds....it is redundant to bot bots then bot the bots with moar bots , just a thought!
( not talking spamming peoples posts with what is already a transparent nature of what they used and how on bots, that thing and the grammarnazi bot feel like root canals)
12bRrSTk8nvPhu.gif

·

moar bots.gif

Now my de facto gif for when people fear there are too many bots. Good point on transparency. Not like they are paying them under the table, we can see whom is bidding, and on what posts.

BidBots - They do not drain the Steem reward pool

OK, but they rarely help fill it back up either.

The problem: Many large accounts who would help keep abuse/rewards in check in the past would flag at will prior to their arrival. @smooth, @freedom, @dan, @ned, @berniesanders, yourself + others would frequently bring the flag out for other whales, and just one or two of you, could cut out whatever abuse was taking place.

I know that you and Bernie still flag from time to time, but the majority of the above have their stake in Bidbots or are no longer flagging. Hence we've had over 6 months of blatant Reward pool abuse from whale accounts.

@fulltimegeek is the only consistent flagger with any real stake, and it is not enough. The @thejohalfiles smashed a couple of EOS shill posts the other day, but the other large stake holders are either absent, or tied to Bidbot delegations.

I don't care about whales getting richer, that is supposed to happen. And I no longer care about shit-posts on Trending boosted by bots. But when you guys cannot manage the abuse at the top between you, then it will (and it has) trickle down through all levels of stakeholders.

I do not want to post 10 posts per day and upvote myself and only myself, lol, that would just create flags against me from other users with more steempower then me.

You should try it. Who's going to flag you? The power is absent/delegated to Bots.

Lovely post... And the pools are amazing.

I don’t use bots , I don’t know how to. But I do upvote content I like and most of the time I upvote people who take the time to reply. Cheers mike

Popping popcorn for the comment section.

Content Creators and Former Trenders will be incoming.

Most of the people who have strong opinions about the bots have the best intentions but were not here to watch the mess that used to be the trending page. Although I think their view is idealistic, their motives are good.

I will go on record to say although I acknowledge they create a few issues, I enjoy SteemIt much better with the voting bots in action.

Then again, I am not afraid to use my flag.

So if I spend $50, I get $1 worth of advertising, PLUS I can vote for this post and your witness account for free?

Where do I sign up!

That's the deal of the century!

And it's called "visibility" so everyone can see my amazing business deal making skills!

Where have you been all my life!

We can jump into the reward pool and not even get wet! So refreshing.

·

no....your cost was $1

·
·

You get one dollar worth of advertising if your advertising cost one dollar, yes. Spent 50 though. Spent 50 for 1 dollar worth of advertising.

If the entire reward pool was $50, those buying and selling these votes have made it worth $1 in reality. That's a fancy way of driving the true value of this reward pool into the ground, and for what? 19 views on your youtube video? That's smart.

fyrst-witness-smallerFS.gif

·

i tried. i got burned.

I have so much to learn!!!! I have been writing articles every day, the best that I could do. It has frustrated me and I am still frustrated, it is not good for my psyche! Reading this article gives me some hope. I am so low in voting power, because I keep upvoting anyone who comments on my article, and upvote people I know for writing articles, regardless of content. In 5 days or so, my VP will be at 100%. I resolve to refrain from upvoting until then. Thank you for this post. I appreciate it. Thank you for sharing your experience and knowledge... not every one, even when asked directly, will tell me. They get major $ upvotes from specific users, and I am so frustrated, it made me cry a couple of times. Sometimes I wish so hard that I be hit by a whale, so that my steem power will be nudged up higher. I need to know how and when to use a specific bidbot. I don't know anything about bidding in auctions. I hope that you will find the time to read this. I need help.

·

LOL Here's @SilverSaver888, and I was thinking of you when Fyrst wrote the section about draining your VP too low. I was going to link you to this article, and encourage you to save up that VP!
If you have a smartphone, I think you can get a Steemit Account linked thru busy.org and then you get a Slider for Voting, regardless of your Banked Up SP! Someone please verify this...

·
·

@underground I found a slider!!!! I am still at 56%, so just a few more days, and I hope to do better with slider! But with the low value of my vote, it is best that I vote at 100% but really limit it to 10 a day. Thanks for your support and your help, my friend. Thanks for having my back.

·

I think you're doing GREAT @silversaver888 :)
You shouldn't be sad at all! Your posts do much better than so many people I know and you have wonderful quality! :)
I'll send you a DM :)

Гениально! Фирстиккен крут!

"The fact our company stay invested with STEEM is because of all the crap content around here, which in investor terms are great because that means there is room to grow, which is awesome for us."

But cant you see this is a bad thing for the growth of the platform? I mean with that comment you acknowledge that your company provides a service that goes against the core ideas behind the platform you are working on.
Are you not saying: "Yes, please give us more crap content, its good for business".

  1. When there is a human factor involved in reward distribution you have creators actively working to improve their content to attract rewards, bringing up the value of the platform.
  2. When you can get to trending with bots by doing the bare minimum of not getting blacklisted (super easy if i might add) then there is absolutely no incentive to improve anything you do.

All of that goes completely against the interest of the platform and in the long term against the interest of you as someone with a large stake here.
Bots automate the reward distribution completely remove the human factor and turn Steemit from a social media website to a massive ad banner.
What happens if bot SP delegation reaches 80%, 90%, 95%?
Whos going to be left here? No new users will come here once they realize that everything with any kind of rewards is bought and payed for. Do you really believe that users will buy SBD/STEEM to pay for upvotes, gambling that the price of Steem will rise so that they can earn a bit? No investors or marketers will come here because they will see that they have no one to advertise to.

What you are left with is people blogging for no one, blogging for no rewards, and spammers in the comment section that dont realize writing:
"oh nice very good post, many lucks family friends".... gains them absolutely nothing.

The bot discussion was never about "reward pool rape". It was about what the future holds if this goes on.

"You were BORN TO STAND OUT" Thats a clever pitch. People are suckers for motivational quotes. ;)

The fact is, bots take away the choice of the community to decide what are the people of value, who are those that bring the most value to all of us. Give bots more SP and there will be absolutely no way to determine that.
Care or care not, im just speaking my mind...

The reason I buy Steem because I'm investing it to bidbots, because without it what's the reason to buy Steem? if it is from small voting profits, I rather buy more Neblio or NEO then with passive profits and some bonus airdrops .

From a marketing point of view indeed the Bidbots make sense, and they used to make a lot of sense when there were only 4 or 5 of them.

Also when they happen to be slightly profitable, they allow to offer someone else a vote much stronger than what most of us can afford and that is a great feature too.

I think the current drama about/against bidBOTs comes from the fact that since the release of the open code for one, everyone and their cat own a bidbot, and due to the increase of demand for delegations the price in the delegation lease market has increased and this has a twofold negative effect.

On one hand since there is a myriad of bots most bods have reduced their ROI making them less interesting for the end user.

On the other hand delegation leasing for organic curation has become prohibitive which is sad.

To cite and example I write in English and Spanish, to me it makes sense to heavily use a biBOT when i post in English to increase the chances of being seen and usually there is ROI from it as there are lots of curators out there.

In spanish thou, considering there are only a few curation groups operating it makes almost no sense as it is almost sure you would not break even. (but you get a gazillion of dust votes 0.001)

I do use bidBOTs in Spanish sometimes when doing my witness updates or when I really want/need to have my content seen, but i do it in all knowledge i am sacrificing ROI for visibility.

bidBOTs and BOTs in general are not bad for the platform, irresponsible users are bad for the platform and with the proliferation of both blacklisting and whitelisting it should be under control.

I think the secret of it all resides into finding a balance between marketing and ROI for the content creators.

The current demand for leases to fuel bidbots driving the price of leases up will be what will flip the balance as eventually the ones fueled only by leases will stop being profitable for bot owners and only the ones running with their own SP will remain.

·

irresponsible users are bad for the platform and with the proliferation of both blacklisting and whitelisting it should be under control.

Indeed, it has become more narrow as we have seen many smart solutions implemented to combat spam/scam etc. It is more profitable for a shitposter to hire quality original writing from a bachelor english writer from a foreign country. They realize there is more money to be made if the post is really good when they trend it. I like it.

Once upon a time...December....they were working out for me, now not so much. If I'm interpreting correctly you see using the bidbots as a marketing function?

·

yes, only a marketing function. It is, of course, awesome when they are profitable, like two days ago when they all were giving out 2X-3X due to the dip in the market and some panic. But essentially they are only tools of marketing, for whatever reason you may have.

You could also add sponsors, ads etc to your blog before you trend it, that way you can get "coca cola or Pepsi" to pay for your marketing in exchange for them to be seen on a trending post... There are many ways to monetize what you do, just be creative.

I agree with you when you said bidbot had in a way reduce self voting as whales can now delegate steem power to bidbots for interest in return. Bidbot have also bring about profit business on the steemit platform. But it should be watched not to promot under rated post on trending feeds.

·

Yeah, back then each post were cringe-worthy due to its shitpost quality with guaranteed upvotes. Very glad we have a more gold standard economy now and the masses have access to steempower through self-serving systems. People should use them instead of being afraid of them. The people who speak loud against bidbots either never tried them or do not what the hell they talk about. Glad things have changed for the better. But it is important to educate people on these things so that FUD and LIES do not get to root.

The BidBot Owners have open communication lines between each other if something needs to be done/changed/talked about...

I know while mentioning bidbots in the discord as "the problem" with curation, @whatsup had explained to me why I was wrong about them being "the problem". The explanation given refered to a time when there were no bidbots. I'm not anti bidbot I just think that it would be an easy way to help make curation better if the bid bots waited until after so many minutes have passed giving people a chance to curate first. Could you please clarify tho why this would not be an optimal way to at least aid in making curation better.

·

Have you heard of @frontrunner? if you trail that account and vote on what he votes on with the same % as he does, you will be frontrunning @booster and earn great curation rewards when @booster votes. There are of course bots on github you can download that can monitor and do this with every bidbot out there. Point is that everyone can earn curation from bidbots by voting before they do, and since it is all transparent it is really easy to do if you need to grow an account for a certain goal etc.

Bidbots also get some of the curations, but frontrunners get the most, a nice little distribution of wealth when you do it right.

It is pretty easy stuff.

·
·

God damn proof of brain hashing algorithm making me fucking work. (would be on frontrunner already but im too poor atm) Working on my first fork actually right now to get monies for that

·
·
·

Yes, Proof Of Brain makes you work. Indeed :)
Good luck with your fork, I hope you make some monies.

@fyrstikken, thanks for this insightful article. Well, I feel the steemit blockchain is structured in a way to favour the investors who turn out to be whales. And even with the advent of bidbots, the system is still being milked by the big guys, the circle-jerking continues. Newbies and minnows are barely supported these by the bigger guys. Only a very few handful of whales want to support others. Bloggers will have to sweat it out and grow in the system if they are consistent or quit if they feel they're not making any tangible progress.

I just wish the system can be more fair and encourage new users to stay, but unfortunately the reverse is the case. Will this system get better than it is now?

Anyway, thanks once again.

·

I just wish the system can be more fair and encourage new users to stay, but unfortunately the reverse is the case. Will this system get better than it is now?

Hmm, well - It cannot become more fair, than fair.

My 1 SP is worth exactly the same as your 1 SP, and there are 77 million STEEM for sale on the markets or in liquid supply as we keep producing more of the stuff. Finding ways to grab some of those STEEM cannot be that hard I think.

·
·

@frystikken I like the way you explained exactly what the spirit of the bid bot should be for the user: a marketing tool. And how you make it clear that the bid bot has to make money, and the user has to pay for a service.
The part that is still fuzzy in my mind, and the reason i'm putting my comment after the trail from @evarich's comment is that, in the current environment that she describes (where bid-bots give some power to the masses to buy SP but there is still a lot of circle-jerk going around, and minnows struggle to make Steemit profitable for them), how do you see the future of Steemit? If the current situation is maintained over time, and minnows come and go but no significant amount of them become dolphins or whales, does Steemit have a future and its currency will maintain its strenght?

·
·
·

Hmm.. Chances are that STEEM could be the place for millionaires and strong political and professional entertainers also... I could see STEEM go to $1000 per token in some years. Will you hodl until then or will you sell for cheap? the millionaire is or is not you in the future.

·
·
·
·

Speaking for myself, I think I'll stick around. The good thing about this platform is that even if you don't invest anything, you can still voice your opinions, learn from others and establish human networks. Tenure in the platform, even if you don't post much but at least keep an active voice, will inevitably transform itself into higher SP and higher rewards. I would be stupid to stop and let my account die, even if at this time I don't feel too enthusiastic to make my blog bloom.
I believe that crypto currencies and block-chain technology are here to stay and I plan to learn as much as I can and teach my kids in the process, so they grow in this environment and can enter and play the game well when they are of age.

·
·
·
·
·

Agreed, this is the new Twitter in some ways. Famous people are on Twitter now and Steemit will continue to accelerate in attracting bigger fish like @Cernovich and @Stefan.Molyneux to name a few.

Thanks for the history lesson on STEEM. That was before I was on here so I am unfamiliar, first hand, with the way things were. I know there were issues in the beginning that are no longer here. I guess bidbots create another issue although I dont bemoan anyone who creates them or uses them.

I do like that you state that they are for marketing purposes (or whatever other personal reasons) and not for a straight up profit on the post. I do agree there are reasons to get one's post ranked and on the trending page. But I fear too many look at it as a pay X and get back X + Y.

Perhaps people will read this post and understand what they are getting into when they do use a bot.

Awesome post, and since ave been among the steemians i have never seen a beutiful post like this on this platform, infact this will really help alot most of the people have been meeting on this platform are only keeping a gooe fruit like these to themeselves, some are even calling themselve whenever the drop a post for the fellow to upvote them so them only sharing ot between themselves but thank God for my friend @kesolink whom introduce steemit to me never hide anyhing, and a very big thanks to u @fyrstikken for breaking everything down here; Yes

         DO NOT DRAIN REWARDPOOL

Yes, when you have something to show or you have to buildup your account then the bidbots are the things, bidbots can help us to get in more followers, more followers means potential upvotes and potential recognition and your product (BLOG POST) will get more exposure and that way your niche will get true value, and when it's come to bidbots many people get into influence due to speculations, but before judging something we have to understand the concept of bidbots and bidbots are nothing but the effective form of promotion so promotion is ancient concept and it's most successful way towards the exposure. Thanks for sharing this post with us and wishing you an great day. Stay blessed. 🙂

Bots ruin all integrity in Steemit

Their form of being able to upvote not only financially, but also one’s reputation score creates a dilemma in preserving the concept that good content gets rewarded.
It makes people lazy in finding good content and instead they sell out their votes to spend their time elsewhere, while becoming more powerful every minute.

Even the Bot Queen @jerrybanfield will

somewhat stop having his bot work for him. At least, the one we know of.

Yes, steemit has grown

but is it only new bots? It sure seems that way.

Stop ruining Steemit! Stop being lazy and stop tarnishing the integrity.

You Bot queens should be banned. The app Lit has banned bots to preserve the integrity and work that it takes to upvote only good content. The bot queens are the ones controlling the trending pages and make good content Original creators give up.

I've been reading a lot on this topic from time to time. This is the first post on this topic that defends bidbots in a very logical way. Very detailed post indeed. I'm for sure going to use this post as a reference for similar posts and also, in posts that I write on this topic. It's good to implement structure when it comes to some organizational or state setup. However, when it comes to this world, something global like Steemit, people from across the world join it and participate as per their capabilities. Facebook could fall flat on the ground in its infancy if it had followed the strict criteria of not allowing everybody saying their hearts out at that platform. It did not do that and eventually, it succeeded to a limit where it had more users than one of the most populated countries in the world. Recently, we have been seeing every 5th post at Facebook as an ad. So, they don't care about quality but still are leading the social media game. Similarly, Steemit is still in its beta stage and it has achieved a lot. There is still a long way to go. Personally, I don't like to axe on my own feet by implementing the strict criteria aiming at quality content. Plagiarism is not acceptable. That being said, if it's original, for me, it's fine. Bidbots have become important part of the game. I don't see them going anywhere. There are always good and bad side of everything. This is also true for bidbots. People were misusing bidbots so an action was taken and a 5 days limit was set. This makes sense and I appreciate it. This is how we will keep seeing improvements in the system but it will take time. Let's not try to build Rome in one day. Good luck @fyrstikken.

Steem On!

Wow.... took me a LONG time to get through all those comments. Well done @fyrstikken on stimulating the discussion.

Seems everybody wants to argue about whether bidbots are good, bad or indifferent... but is that really what this debate is about?

Or is this really a intro to the greater debate of "What IS Steemit and Steem?"

If we're to take the approach that it's primarily a "Social Content Platform," where the Steemit front end (and variations) serves as a large "storefront window" to the Steem blockchain... a venue that (potentially) could offer millions the easiest possible onboarding into the world of cryptos, that requires one kind of approach. I can take myself as an example: Without Steemit, I would still be stuck at "heard of Bitcoin a few times," not "invested in multiple currencies," as I am now. So let's put that on the side table for a moment.

If we're to take an approach more along the lines of what @whatsup suggested in her comments, and decide that this is primarily A Vessel to Attract Investors, then that dictates a completely different approach. Institutional investors and millionaires could give a rat's ass what some minnow thinks about bid bots and the reward pool. So let's put THAT one on the side table, as well.

If we're to take the approach that there's some greater idealistic purpose and Steemit/Steem is A Catalyst for Social Change, then that's a whole different kettle of fish, once again. In this case, both capitalism and quality content get pushed a bit aside in favor of community building and perhaps developing the idea of this as a "gift economy," a characterization I first saw floated by @stellabelle, more than a year ago.

So now we have at least THREE permutations sitting on the table. I'm sure there are more? ARE there more? If so, what are they?

For me, it begs the question whether or not Steemit/Steem can be all three? More specifically, can it be all three without each component destroying the others?

I don't remember who said this, but this IS A Unique Experiment. When you invest $5mn of your own money in Apple, you get to own $5mn worth of Apple stock. You DO not get to materially get involved in the running of Apple. At most, you get to cast a vote at the annual shareholders meeting. Here? Things are a little different. In a sense, the situation is a strange opportunity in which you can "buy your way" to being a "Benevolent Altruist," or a "Ruthless Capitalist," or perhaps a "World Changing Community Builder," or a "Self-involved Jackhole," ALL OF THEM with the knowledge that your level of influence is such that pretty much "nobody can touch you."

So, what IS this place, to you? YOU? And anyone else. And ALL of us?

Since people seem fond of analogies — fruit trees and farming and such — let me leave y'all with this one:

Right now it seems like we're in this giant BOAT together. And it's out on the ocean somewhere. And some of us have paddles, and some have oars, and some have sails, and some have outboard motors... and some of these are tiny, and some are HUGE... and we're all trying to move the boat. Somewhere. But we barely have a sea chart, and nobody actually knows where we're going, and we don't even have comprehensive talks about where we WANT to go... but everybody is frantically using their propulsion device to go in "SOME" direction!

How well is that WORKING for everyone?

.
I dunno... it increasingly has a "Tower of Babel" feel to me...

Meh. It just occurred to me that I am three days into this post's life and nobody's going to read this.... ah well, such is life.

·

I generally avoid this side of the blockchain. I have wondered about where the platform is going, especially after reading @malicered's post a while back.

It really got me thinking and I wrote about it. Basically, if everything stays the same for the foreseeable future, I imagined Steemit being a mining platform with the biggest stakeholders taking in the shares and "contents" will only be "mining nodes" to be voted on.

Of course, when that happens, the platform probably has no value even with major burn operations going on in the background.

Waoo!
You just hit the nail by it head
Most misunderstood what this bots does and blindly make critics

I'm so happy to read this after a month off steemit and this is the 3rd article I bookmarked

Spread the word bidbot are doing great!!

i think bot are good for us but we must to use them wisely.
good luck!!!
have a great day!!!

The reason I purchase Steem in light of the fact that I'm contributing it to bidbots, on the grounds that without it what's the motivation to purchase Steem? on the off chance that it is from little voting benefits, I rather purchase more Neblio or NEO then with aloof benefits and some extra airdrops .

Why should you rape the reward pool if your VP is low? If your VP is low your vote is worth less and so you aren't raping it.

Thanks we were all in wrong impression

@fyrstikken ni e article you had written and also very good images...

Excellente article! *****

You have the whole reason, you are brilliant. Thank you, for sharing with us.

Lovely weekend ;-} @supernova55

good post

I support this motion

It's your vote do with it what you want. If you want to sell it that's fine. Someone is always willing to buy votes to gain influence. The more bid bots there are the more people that can raise their reputation, to protect themselves from down votes on their shit post, because you can only really have an effect on someone with less reputation score than yourself when it comes to down votes, yes you can remove a few pennies or dollars from the post payout, but you are never going to touch that person's reputation. With bid bots we can have lots and lots of Reputation level 80 people by the end of the year. Even if they do not have any SP at all. I look at some people that have joined since december, and they are in the mid 60's reputation, yet have virtually no SP. No vote power, and no Steem. And are really earning nothing.

I think more bid bots are going to be built, I think more people are going to BUY their reputation level. I think that will be great. We need more people with Reputations of 70 on steemit, and now instead of a steady climb over the course of a year and a half, they can do it in less than half the time, and then act like big shits with no SP.

Reputation 74 in 3 months will mean absolutely nothing to anyone, other than the accusations of oh they bought their reputation. And in 80 percent of the cases it will be true.

But really, people are allowed to sell votes, people are allowed to buy votes, and people can vote for what they want, or not vote, or down vote, all based on how they feel at the time of voting, and that is the way it should be, your vote, your choice.

Enjoy your level 74 Reputation, I am sure there will be many many more joining you soon.

i dont received my upvote in the last round,i send you two tranfers , 2.5 SBD

i hear first time about people live in bidbots and and i read such a amazing writing.
a great and fruitful result u rewarded.

Two things @fyrstikken. Yea, I mentioned you so as to have your attention.

  1. Care to elaborate how the pool is refilled with fresh water when lots of greedy people, not just limited to bots, are constantly draining it on a daily basis? You never talk about that in details, let us know in layman's terms.

  2. How do bid bots owners handle those malicious flags targeted at the trending posts which resulted in a loss of investment?

·

The pool fills and pays at a constant rate. There is no such thing as 'draining' the reward pool really. Either it goes one place or it goes another. Every. Single. Day. People whining about 'draining' are essentially saying they don't like where it is going (which is a valid opinion to have, but the 'draining' rhetoric is just that).

·
·

Simple as that.
You couldn' explain it better.

·
·

OK, nice! Great information. I upvoted you 100%.👌

vote for vote
I give you an up vote on your first post! Please give me a follow and I will give you a follow in return!
You also should give me up vote in my blog than I also give you. If you give me up vote than replay this …

·

No one wants your zero cent upvote

Now I really think bidbot is using the right way to help out. Many said they are crippling the rewards but I see that if they do not have the correct voting power how they help out, correct! Oh I try to shorten what I really mean. That is they help instead make worst.

i agree with all of this, but still i hate bidbots, because they are deleting good content from trending and hot page

A nice swimming pool^^

When you explain it like that, they don't sound as bad as they're made it to be.

a have been using the tag nobidbot fore som time is not like a dont like bidbost its just it not fore me. a under stand more an more on how it works
a feel most minnow dont understand how it works and then are mad at the system not relay understand how it works. the more a understand the less a care. its a good thing a care on my posts and my freands here but not on ther negativity here on steemit. so just follow the flow dont be the rock in the river.

So concise. When I read this article I'm so glad to have joined STEEM at the time I did. Seems like there's been some interesting evolutionary measures on the platform..

the pool is always full and has everything for everyone :)

Great post, keep up the good work. There is to much bs regarding bid bots, they are a great opportunity and actually level the playing field like you have pointed out here.

Great post, keep up the good work. There is to much bs regarding bid bots, they are a great opportunity and actually level the playing field like you have pointed out here.

I've never had an issue with bidbots (still don't, use them from time to time) but I love reading about steemit's history, learning why some love them while others despise them. Guess in time I'll make to my choice.
Cheers for the good read and the rich history :)

The truth is the stakeholders are the ones to decide on how the stakes should run no one can reap from he or she did not sow

tl;dr but OMG so much this

I do not want to post 10 posts per day and upvote myself and only myself, lol, that would just create flags against me from other users with more steempower

so is it like this

if I spend $50 to their then , their will be marketing cost just $1, \and get $49 worth of upvotes.

Yes, I guess the current system of purchasing bot votes is an improvement over the days where steemit users would all just upvotes their friends.

However, it still feels strange to have to purchase bots in order for your content to be recognized.

I think good authors have the mindset that their excellent content will speak for themselves and they will get the recognition that it deserves without having to spend money.

I know when I first started, I got pretty bummed out that my articles made $0.00 when I thought I did a pretty good job.

Anyways, I know that the ideal situation is to have your content recognized without paying but I guess the current system is of course much better than the old one whereby people just upvote their friends. Good post =)

The ones who rape the rewardpool are easy to spot as they have drained their own vote-power down to an almost minimum, so stupid

So taking less from the reward pool by consuming all its voting power is considered as reward pool rape while taking more by intelligently restricting ones votes to 10 a day is not? I don't get it.

Congratulations @fyrstikken!
Your post was mentioned in the Steemit Hit Parade in the following categories:

  • Comments - Ranked 9 with 101 comments
  • Pending payout - Ranked 3 with $ 605,66

I see this post and understand some of those arguments. But why the hell are you commenting like this (see below)? I don't see anything good whithin such thing and must question your arguments while reading that you are willing to violate people in front of their family and stuff and self-voting such comment big time! What about that?

crap.png

Thanks for the info @fyrstikken. The truth is that we all went through the inconvenience of not having votes in the post and what one wants most is to see the results of their work. You just have to be patient and continue with the work.

I concur that bidbots are greatly improved than the uberwhale/uberminnow framework that Steemit began with.

Despite everything we have far to go before Steemit makes its mark, be that as it may. I think that its entertaining that relatively every post on the inclining page is still about Steemit itself. The day will come when we fan out an online networking stage, yet until further notice...

All things considered, for the time being there is impact to be fabricated. The cost of Steem is still (moderately) shoddy, it's as yet conceivable to fabricate a brand here before the organization "opens up to the world", in a manner of speaking.

Wow thanks allot, now I Am understanding some secrets behind this Steemit , though on your previous post you said we the minnows she get off our ass and do something meaningful with our life and I still stand that the only way the minnows can grow is, if only whales can help thanks

Not enough is said about the effect of the bidbots. If you write a post you shouldn't have to get a bidbot to upvote it. That is not a community. There is something majorly wrong here that people have to think in this way. the bid bot creators are making the money and people are just tossing their hard earned money away. If members want to use bots that is fine but at least put a limit on the amounts paid and the number of posts per week. I guarantee you new members won't stay if it carries on the way it is. There is no future with Steem the way it is. It has to change for the better of everyone on here. Short sighted greed is not the answer.

  ·  4년 전

You got a 81.58% upvote from @upme thanks to @clayford! Send at least 3 SBD or 3 STEEM to get upvote for next round. Delegate STEEM POWER and start earning 100% daily payouts ( no commission ).

  ·  4년 전

20180604_034949.png
Dear @booster , i send you .800 SBD some days ago, but you dont return this SBD, may be you are forgotten this. i wish you will check your story and return my sbd plz.

  ·  4년 전

I must agree with you.
bots make opportunity to smaller people To by even visible at all there is not so many ways for people who are talented but don't have money to be noticed

It's definitely a complex argument with valid points on either side. It really just depends which direction the platform wants to head into the future.

Bidbots are just a way for people to promote their content. People are always going to want to do this, and when there is a demand, someone will supply it. I am #probidbots

NICE POOL

All strategies are good in order to get more scores in our publications and of course ... more income!

I agree that bidbots are much better than the uberwhale/uberminnow system that Steemit started out with.

We still have a long way to go before Steemit comes into its own, however. I find it amusing that almost every post on the trending page is still about Steemit itself. The day will come when we branch out out a social media platform, but for now...

Well, for now there is influence to be built. The price of Steem is still (relatively) cheap, and it's still possible to build a brand here before the company "goes public", as it were.

I'm looking forward to where we go from here.

·

The day will come when we branch out out a social media platform, but for now...

i highly doubt that will come anytime soon as were still a huge work in progresss

Thank you I find this post helpful and got rid of some of the myths I had from other users. Thanks for taking your time writing this intriguing article

Thanks for showing me the other side! You may have convinced me to use one, i spend a lot of time when i write an article and it's disheartening when i get no readers. I'm knew to steemit and was wondering what is the best ways to get views

@fyrstikken Thank you for explaining the bid-bot economics. I have few questions regarding post promotion economics.

A few months ago I watched Ned's video from SteemFest 2016.

He says the following at 1:09 minutes into the video:

For the first time you can bootstrap a currency now with Steem around people's attention. So people are paying their attention to the website, to steemit.com or to another website based on Steem. And then those people can say to people who want their attention: advertisers or people who want to promote posts - "You can only get your content into my feed if you pay me".

I might be wrong, but it seems to me, rewarding and incentivizing the content consumption is neglected on the platform. Not everybody can be a great blogger, vlogger, content creator. In my opinion, a majority are content consumers. But since content consumption doesn't get rewarded as much, many focus on becoming content creators.

Since bid-bots serves as providing visibility, promotion, and marketing for its users, maybe bit-bots can fill the gap of rewarding content consumers as a mechanism of incentivizing consumption of bid-bot voted posts.

Can Dtube model of curation reward distribution be implemented in bid-bots? For example, a bid-bot can share 50% percent of its curation rewards with those who voted on the posts, giving them additional curation reward.

Do you think something like this or other innovative methods can attract more people to view and consume promoted posts? Can this even be viable for bid-bots?

You mentioned @frontrunner in one of the comments. That is a good idea to maximize curation rewards. However, it only works for automated votes, which doesn't really encourage content consumption. What other methods do think post promoters can implement in the future that will incetivize manual curation and content consumption? or is there even need for that?

My thoughts are bid-bots have a great potential to revolutionize and bring new creative ways of advertising that can also benefit the ad/post/content consumers.

Thank you for your answers in advance.

·

This is a great comment, thank you for sharing the video too. A shame no response was provided.

Steemit is becoming more and more advanced but seems hard to make it these days unless you swim with the whales. Kind of keeps me from investing more I wonder if others feel the same way?

Great view

you seem to have the impression that the reward pool depends on the total vp and that not optimally using your vp will result in less rewards. Can you clarify this? I was under the assumption that the only reason why we should optimally use our vp is to make it harder to exploit the reward pool, but not change the size of the reward pool

On the very first part I definatly feel you. While I love steem and everything it represents, upvoting someone but not seeing any difference feels very hollow. That being said, I am looking forward to the day that will change.

I actually tried out some bots with the first scraps of reward money I received just yesterday. So far, it has been good. Haven't crushed any big waves, obviously, but I can see how doing that constantly in the right way can help you reinvest your income on here to help further your growth.

Any tips you can give on using bots as a minnow?

I dont think so too much these information but photos really really wonderfull ;)) I love this things and I want to be there all of them :D thank you ..

Here's the @penguinpablo daily statistic about paidbots. Between 1-2%. Nothing crucial...

How can it be that 'do' and 'not' became tags in your post? You, someone who has been here from the beginning, could make a mistake like that. It's surprising.

No, matter. I wonder whether you actually spent more on bitbots than you are getting in reward.

Thanks for that post. I will stay with my up votes . I am taking care of to not get to low my voting power

If we are born to stand out, then we will try different things to stand out including things I may not like and things you may disagree with. I believe in freewill and and that the better ideas and posts will rise and that the rewards cannot be raped. People who support communism may also say that the reward pools can be raped. I believe in free markets, and that we all have to fight for the rewards pool. I do not believe in sharing the pool. I believe in fierce competition. I do not upvote myself, currently, but I don't care if people do it as that is their choice. I do not want to tell people what they can or cannot do. Let the markets decide. In time, the better ways survive. Upvoting one self is like smoking. I do not smoke but I do not tell people not to smoke. It is up to each person to smoke or not to smoke. And it is better to not smoke. But freewill is even better than forcing people to do this or to do that. #FreeTommy

This post has received a 100.00 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @clayford, @clayford.

very very nice

in my opinion.postingan you are very cool and good, in addition tu useful for me and for all colleagues steemit.dan hopefully your post will be better again amiin thanks for the postingannya.in my opinion.postingan you are very cool and good, in addition tu useful for me and for all colleagues steemit.dan hopefully your post will be better again amiin thanks for the postingannya.in my opinion.postingan you are very cool and good, in addition tu useful for me and for all colleagues steemit.dan hopefully your post will be better again amiin thanks for the postingannya.

in my opinion.postingan you are very cool and good, in addition tu useful for me and for all colleagues steemit.dan hopefully your post will be better again amiin thanks for the postingannya.

Hi @fyrstikken
Personally, I am totally against Bitbots, for the simple reason that it is against the logic that the best content should be rewarded on merit. (I know this is not as it is working even if we had no bidbots). Further to this the BitBot owner is the person that makes the most money out of this, where the author almost don't benefit, except for the fact that he/she does get exposure and may gain followers if the post is good. I also believe that the bidbot owners also get additional curation rewards, as users of the service normally get a few bidbots to vote, thus pushing up the rewards on a sometimes not deserving post, this seems like reward pool drain to me. I suppose one can say that the bid bot owners do give value to the users, otherwise there would be no demand for the, this is just my feelings on the subject.
Thanks for sharing your view on the subject.

excelente post :D

Good article . I put my voice down. This should be seen by many. Please give me also.

Хорошая статья . Я ставлю свой голос. Это должны увидеть многие. Поставь пожалуйста и мне.

Great post in which I am in full agreement @fyrstikken ! long time no see my friend! I use the. https://steembottracker.com/ everyday, It's a fantastic tool. upped and resteemed!👍👍👍✌

This post has received a 10.08 % upvote from @boomerang.

Then there should be 1 and only bidbot. And who would that be? 😂

·

There are blockchain limits, so we need a lot of bidbots because one single bot can only serve max 28,800 upvotes per day without a comment, and only 4,320 upvotes with a comment/receipt, and there are over 1 million accounts and a lot of activity. Remember you can only vote every 3 seconds and comment every 20 seconds, those numbers play a large role in how the bots have a maximum potential.

The problem with bidbots is that they are rent-seeking behavior that ultimately does not benefit the platform as a whole. They simply allow higher payouts to be provided to posts of any quality level. Ultimately, I think this breaks the economic engine of Steemit.

Informative - thanks

Non-proof of brain voting, as is done with voting bots, is mining counterfeit steem in my opinion.

I really needed to hear this. I've been debating a lot lately about whether to go full on with the bid bots, as I'm one of those people building a STEEM brand that will reach into the physical world, and organic reach is becoming harder and harder.

I have had a plan in the works for a while to boost myself and my project to at least dolphin status, and it may just be time to enact said plan

Good I like and follow you

Excellent analysis and advice and response to bot haters. Whales are not haters as now a common steemians need not to buttress but just go and buy the upvotes , increase visibility, make brand. And all that for free.

Bots are the best development on the Steem platform.

in my opinion.postingan you are very cool and good, in addition tu useful for me and for all colleagues steemit.dan hopefully your post will be better again amiin thanks for the postingannya.