Bidbot Power on the Rise
Many who have read what I post for a while know that I've been opposed to bidbots from the start. It's disheartening to me to see that there is so much support for bidbots that their influence is reaching into the top 20 witnesses to cement this into the platform. They are being rewarded for promoting a pay-to-play system on Steem.
Source
I just wanted to share the news, in case you didn't know. The love of bidbots is strong. People want to support those who operate them. Since the platform is ruled by money, it makes sense. Bidbots get more money to people who have money delegated to them. The money votes for the money. There's nothing those of us with less money can do, other than buy a lot of STEEM lol. Money power rules, and so bidbot power and influence rises on the platform.
Did you know that over 1/3 of the rewards on the platform (34.7%) are being allocated to posts by bidbots now? Yup. A whole 1/3 of all the rewards on the platform are being decided by bidbots. More than 1/3 of rewards are being allocated based on buying votes for posts, rather than posts being votes on by members of the community.
Do you think this appeals to the majority of people to get them to join and stay on Steem? Will bidbots champion in an era of wider mass adoption for Steem?
Thank you for your time and attention. Peace.
If you appreciate and value the content, please consider: Upvoting, Sharing or Reblogging below.
me for more content to come!
Like what I do? Then consider giving me a vote on the Witness page :) Thanks!
My goal is to share knowledge, truth and moral understanding in order to help change the world for the better. If you appreciate and value what I do, please consider supporting me as a Steem Witness by voting for me at the bottom of the Witness page.
I have not liked bidbots since the very beginning.
Many people say "it's just promotion" and I can buy into that IF — and only IF — a very simple tweak is made to move ANY post that has a bidbot vote from "Trending" to "Promoted."
Don't ban them, don't outlaw them, just label them for what they are: "Sponsored Content."
Every other social site on the planet does that with content people PAY to make visible. Why are WE so "special" that such a standard wouldn't apply here?
Yeah, I know...
"But then people might think my content is actually shit!"
They might. So why don't you create some content that is not shit, and stands on its own merit?
"But that's not FAIR! I should have as much right to the rewards as anyone else!"
Sure... and you should have the "right" to the rewards from conducting brain surgery at a hospital, even though all you've ever done is be a butcher's assistant... because? Because? Anyone? Bueller?
But it seems to me we have been over this many times, and I think you know where I fall on the opinion scale...
Transparency isn't desired. Scamming the system to make money is though. What you say is better than what we have. I have suggested payouts for votes purchased should go back to the reward pool, or sent to null. That way, it's an actual promotion/ad being purchased, not a suction of the reward pool that all the other honest players get less of by actually having their content rewarded through others evaluating it to merit such high rewards.
I like your idea of moving it to sponsored content.
You got my witness vote! I hope more people will understand the threat bidbots pose to the future of the platform.
Thank you for the support! I appreciate it :)
It will correct itself when they run out of folks easily parted from their money paying for overbid rounds and losing money. That happens quite a lot. The bots make out, their delegators make out, but the ones buying it will eventually wise up. Even those who aren't the sharpest knife in the drawer will have to understand when they run out of means to pay it wasn't profitable, lol.
And it isn't like anyone uses the feeds they rank on. I haven't looked at Hot or Trending since my second month here. I get all the action I need in my personal feed from those I follow.
Last time I checked you gain 10-25% back from what you pay.
I have avoided trending since the beginning of my time here. I've made it there a few times back in the day from organic votes, but a lot of content was favoritism voting for friends and always the same people were there. Now its the same people but they pay to get there..
The trick is to always use "bots less used", which usually have no cap on ROI to keep rolling. Nothing beats sending out 0.1 Steem and get 100% vote from the bots. Many of them are not on Steem Bot Tracker.
It's a good thing you don't check Trending. It's usually just one person and their other accounts at the top if nobody else is bidding.
Interesting to know. Most people seem unaware of this, as I was and are pissed when they get back less than they paid.
Yeah, trending sucks. It made me think I was going to be rich when I first joined. I didn't know about the bots yet and thought this was an easy crowd to please.
There are 'hot' and 'trending' pages? wow.
lol
I think we need new algorithm for trendig and hot posts, because its to easy to game right now. For example in google there is not easy to be in top3, why in steemit its like more u pay the more people see you, its kinda stupid. IF we not change rankings algo, then bidbots/circle jerks will still go more stronger
Been a long time we need a new page, but Steemi Inc. doesn't give a shit.
I will confess that I have used bitbots in the past. I just saw others using them and I figured that was just what you did. After being on Steemit for over a year now, I just write because that is what I like to do (and am trying to get better at it). I have seen an improvement in my posts, so that is the best outcome I could ask for right now.
I think that if more just had that altruistic approach of doing the right thing for the Steemit community at large, bidbots wouldn't be making the money that they are right now.
Unfortunately, I don't have the answers. I just live and learn.
Yes, if only people though of their success inclusively in the platform rather than their success in money exclusively with disregard for the platform's long-term success...
Altruistic behaviors seem a rarity these days, for sure.
this is complaint, can you alter a complaint into a request by adding a statement like, "and this is what we should do about it..."
Buy more STEEM, right? I said that. What else can we do? Code changes to disincentivize it, which I have suggested in the past, aren't going to be adopted because the top witnesses decide if code is accepted, and they are voted pretty much based on freedom who supports bidbots. Any suggestions other than buy STEEM to influence the witness ranks? That's all I see as being able to change things.
When dapps or other initiatives will have higher ROI than bots, all those"investors" will delegate their funds to useful apps and just like that, bots will be gone...like once and for all
How does a dapp or other initiative pay people for delegating? Can you give examples? Wouldn't this apply only for dapps that get paid for something in order to pay delegators? Thanks.
The same way actifit, or steem-ua or any of the sort do.
When apps are adopted in real world this is what's going to happen.
Don't they work through paying delegators from the curation rewards from votes? Just like bidbots? Or what am I missing...
They do...but most also pay delegators with smt’s, which might be worthless at the moment but when they are finally launched (they will at some point) some will have substantial value.
At the moment it is just accumulation...in a few months apps will be more profitable
I agree, and wrote on this very recently; that groups will develop that will take the profts available from the blockchain and redistribute them according to their own criteria.
If the core economic model of Steem does not change, then this will be the next development.
Sounds good in theory, but what sort of dapp could generate revenue to sweeten the pot?
What we should do about it is have a small team dedicated to taking a profound look at the blockchain's economic algorithms.
Bidbots are just an obvious and logical manifestation of a system whereby exchanging a transfer for an upvote can be profitable for both parties.
The ire towards bidbots should be turned to the economics that allows their existence. I have written about these issues recently as well as some 18 months ago, when I actually did have some preliminary discussions with a Steemit Inc dev. It may have not been a polished or complete solution but we may have had one by now if there was the will to at least have a few people research this properly.
It is not easy and I don't see any other blockchain having a solution - they all have different problems that seem only to be resolved with more human interventions. What this means is that if there is a solution, then it would be pioneering and change the rules of cryptoeconomic systems.
"Give me some liquid Steem/SBD and you'll get 20% or more in SP and liquid rewards."
"Oh yeah, suppress all flagging activities and make them seem violent, we gotta stack coins."
I wonder why some people think Steem is a scam.
Whenever I see a bid bot with inadequate support channels upvote plagiarizers, etc. I give them a few downvotes. Irresponsible services should not be allowed to increase reputation scores, etc.
It's a scamma's paradise ;)
I just saw a documentary about Buffett on Netflix: One of the things he stresses is the importance of having a fence around your investment. Even in a decentralised environment (or even more so), you need fences. Just as the medieval free city-states. Good fences make good neighbors.
While I have rarely used them as I think they mostly benefit themselves, I do think they serve a purpose to combine buyers and sellers of stake for a central purpose which is promotion. However, I do believe that has been evolving and overextending and with the metric you share of it being 33% of the rewards is surprising. I wonder if it is possible to scale the benefits and amounts as they draw more from the reward pool to ensure a balance in the ecosystem. I probably don’t know enough to make a smart opinion but I agree that the trend is concerning.
Posted using Partiko iOS
Yeah, they get delegations, and get curation rewards that grows their coffers in an automated system without doing anything but exploiting the platform to draw more out of it.
I agree that bidbots are not ideal, but what are you supposed to do about it: You can not regulate a free market.
This is not a "free market", it is a market encoded by economic algorithms.
One can change the algos to minimise what is seen as detrimental to the whole economic system.
Code can be changed to disfavor the use, making it only about promoting with no rewards from buying votes. That's one way. Otherwise, STEEM needs to be in the hands of those who will vote in for the change. STEEM money rules and gets to decide what happens.
It all goes back to money. I try to stay away from them. Thanks for sharing @krnel