Setting children's rules of behavior is one of the most important and difficult tasks for parents at the same time, as the child resists much to assert his independence. Many people say, "My son does not care about the system, takes off his shoes, leaves his needs anywhere, he does not care, he plays, or sits in his place to watch television programs.
And do not care about others, and if you mention the negligence and negative, he says: I do what I like, and this is my matter ». Many studies indicate that children may learn to neglect their parents in an involuntary manner, when they tend to use the servants and depend on them in most of their affairs. It is a manifestation of neglect to find neglected people ignore household rules and family regulations and interpret them accordingly.
And he loves to neglect his habits of extravagance, he may watch television and video games and the Internet abnormally, and find his books and papers and needs scattered, and does not keep the cleanliness and safety of his books, and usually tries to finish his duties in the last minute, and if he began work is not completed, and leaves work and supplies on The earth does not return it to its place.
off-topic, obv spam etc
flagging because it's long and I don't want anyone to get sucked into reading it like it's a real comment
I can't help but read flagged comments. I'm just to curious.
Then I tend to take a look at their blog, you know to see what sort of stuff they put out.
Then their comments. Wow that's almost 800 comments a month. I thought I talked a lot.
Then of course their wallet, you know to see just how much reward pool rape they are paying for. Let's just say I understand why their rep is at 57.
Well deserved smack-down. Clearly your post wasn't even read prior to the comment.
Right! There's definitely a Streisand Effect with that.
Ohhh they use bots!!
I'm still surprised when I see big payouts on a post, like I haven't fully adjusted to botting culture yet. And then remember, oh right, bots, they just paid for it.
Man, you'd think one angle is enough.
Actually, one angle is what he really should stick to. Paying for bots AND spamming up a storm could backfire pretty bad on him (his blog posts could get flagged, and he'd still be out what he spent on bots). You shouldn't pay for bots and spam at the same time lol.
BidBot's are complected. There are people who use them, I have respect for,(although I still don't like it) and there are many others that use them to push up crap every time they post.
Like I don't think I would mind so much if it was checked by a person first. I understand that at times it is very beneficial to get more exposure on certain things. It just seems that everyone uses this excuse, for things that well, just don't need it. It's like the boss that everyday says om man this is an emergency we got to rush. After a few days, people are like; "Uh no it's not, this is just the same old bs as usual."
I also wish that the "bidbots" and really any bot worked differently than human accounts. In that they could give rewards but no boost in rep. I feel that it wouldn't be to hard to remove that ability from accounts that perform operations to quickly for humans to do. That being said I'm no coder, nor do I understand fully how this blockchain works, so I'm not even sure that such a thing would be possible. It just seems to be pretty silly that one can buy both rewards and rep, eventually making themselves untouchable from those that do not.
At the end of the day, delegating to bidbots is the easiest way to maximize ROI without ever needing to engage with the community(therefore making oneself untouchable from flags). So it's hard to imagine that it's going away anytime soon.
Maybe someday I will have to view them differently, but thankfully that's not today.
That's a good point. Even if there's a decent enough role for bumping the payout, bumping Rep score doesn't seem to have any redeeming side.
I'm not sure how the coding works and if it would be easy to code certain accounts out of counting for Rep. (The other issue then is the 'moral hazard' of deciding that some accounts don't count.. while bots are one thing, we maybe wouldn't want to get into the territory of "well does that account really deserve Rep influence?", like we probably don't want any mechanism that could do it.. maybe you'd need them to voluntarily offer not to count, and hope that the market would reward that choice.)
A non-technical way to do it would be that the bidbots never post. (I don't know too much of their model and if this would be possible. Seems they need to post. But maybe they could execute the bids from a different account.) And then if that account has only Rep 25 it won't ever bring anyone above 25. Or a twist on that is that people can start flagging bot accounts until they're down to 25 or something suitably low.
It's funny because Rep always seemed limited. If one person is a 58 and another is a 65, you wouldn't necessarily feel like the 65 is bound to be producing better content or you'd trust your life with them. But it would at least tell you they're both unlikely to be trolls. That was the one way decent indicator, that the higher you go the more likely you are to be a normal user. But that's compromised now.
I imagine there are probably certain tweaks that could be made to the algorithm that might dampen their impact.
I think it would need a big overhaul tho before "buying a high Rep" would no longer be an issue. (In a sense the bots are kind of a blessing in that they quickly shed light on a theoretical issue.)
But anyways, I've always felt that for a rating system to work correctly, there needs to be some way to "rate the rater". I don't know how exactly. But there needs to be some incentive towards rating "correctly" and for the system to weight more heavily those who are good at rating.
(The Rep system weights more heaving those who have a good rating but that's different than being good at rating other people. There needs to be a vested interest in how accurately you rate.)