Is this an automatically generated message @transparencybot? You should consider whitelisting @tipu and other bots that share their votes with steem power delegators. You would also do well to consider when a post has been chosen by @Curie, helpie, and other such manual curation groups— such as this post. Lastly, it might be thoughtful to consider charitable posts and similar types of posts for manual review for your notice. Essentially, your service is also a bot (or bot-like) and insensitively giving a negative impression of those who use automation. Which is interesting, considering your doing so via some kind of automation. Lastly, I'm not personally opposed to using bid-bots. I'm only opposed to mis-using bid bots. In this case, I have actually returned 92 cents where 28 cents benefits curators. I like to benefit those who choose to curate my content— as it's generally considered good content by most of the manual curation services.
The bot is just getting started and does have a lot of learning to do. I would agree there certainly is no apparent abuse in your post. The bots listed in the comments are simply those found on steembottracker. I am going to try to refine this bot and give it more intelligence as feedback is received.
Hi @bycoleman, maybe you could have the bot look at the rshares given by the bidbots. A post that breaks $50 but only had a tiny $ amount of bot votes like this one is obviously quite a lot different than one which received all the payout from bots.
When the bot first started, it looked at the total payout (of at least $50.00) and then looked to see if it used bidbots and if so, created the comment.
This was changed a few hours after the bot started.
Only post having bidbot payouts in excess of $50.00 are commented on. Unfortunately, there is always a little tweaking and learning to do on a project like this.
It could be as simple as excluding posts that have a vote by @curie.
Another consideration I forgot to mention is payout calculation. For instance, I had to correct my post because I returned 92 cents (27 of which goes to curators.) However, I spent less than I returned (obviously, as there was profit.) Interestingly enough, I believe I spent bidding the same amount that benefits the curators from the return— or that's the goal. Thus basically transferring my bid to additional curation rewards. If the total calculation of bids (not payout) is less than the curation reward payout, and the value of real votes exceeds the bot payout by 80%, it's less likely to be some kind of foul play.
In other words, high paying posts that get real votes from real people and whose bot use is negligible, where the actual payout after curation rewards is exceedingly more than they spent on the actual bids- are probably fine.
If you notice, most of the trending page abuse is dolphins and above. Hitting minnows who are just learning is very discouraging. I have pretty tough skin but I'm sure you don't want your bot to be counterproductive and scare away new users who are creating worthwhile content that gets genuinely rewarded.
It may also be worthwhile to consider the average payout of the last 10 posts. Usually, hardcore users consistently raise all of their posts to $100 or more. Those who are peer rewarded generally have a 1 or 2 high paying posts out of 10, the rest are getting $1-$10.
Just offering some ideas (take or leave) and thanks again for the congrats. ♥️
Thank you again for your reply, you are making very valid arguments.
Keep in mind, the mission for transparency bot is to provide transparency to the network, not make judgements. As soon as I start judging who's post is worthy, it looses all value.
I am going to look into many of the things you have mentioned as they have merit.
Please see this list of abusers, and you will know why this bot is in action.
Is this an automatically generated message @transparencybot? You should consider whitelisting @tipu and other bots that share their votes with steem power delegators. You would also do well to consider when a post has been chosen by @Curie, helpie, and other such manual curation groups— such as this post. Lastly, it might be thoughtful to consider charitable posts and similar types of posts for manual review for your notice. Essentially, your service is also a bot (or bot-like) and insensitively giving a negative impression of those who use automation. Which is interesting, considering your doing so via some kind of automation. Lastly, I'm not personally opposed to using bid-bots. I'm only opposed to mis-using bid bots. In this case, I have actually returned 92 cents where 28 cents benefits curators. I like to benefit those who choose to curate my content— as it's generally considered good content by most of the manual curation services.
I hope a human reads my feedback.
Thank you for the reply.
The bot is just getting started and does have a lot of learning to do. I would agree there certainly is no apparent abuse in your post. The bots listed in the comments are simply those found on steembottracker. I am going to try to refine this bot and give it more intelligence as feedback is received.
Blessings
Hi @bycoleman, maybe you could have the bot look at the rshares given by the bidbots. A post that breaks $50 but only had a tiny $ amount of bot votes like this one is obviously quite a lot different than one which received all the payout from bots.
Carl, great to hear from you.
When the bot first started, it looked at the total payout (of at least $50.00) and then looked to see if it used bidbots and if so, created the comment.
This was changed a few hours after the bot started.
Only post having bidbot payouts in excess of $50.00 are commented on. Unfortunately, there is always a little tweaking and learning to do on a project like this.
Good to hear! I should add that I 100% support this initiative of yours and can only say I wish it wasn't necessary. Cheers - Carl
Thank you!! That means a lot coming from you.
Man, you said it, I truly wish it was not necessary.
The bot is coming under some pretty concentrated attacks now and it will probably get worse each day.
https://steemit.com/steemit/@transparencybot/the-daily-coverup-transparency-under-attack-4-13-18
♥️Thank you for your review of my feedback.
It could be as simple as excluding posts that have a vote by @curie.
Another consideration I forgot to mention is payout calculation. For instance, I had to correct my post because I returned 92 cents (27 of which goes to curators.) However, I spent less than I returned (obviously, as there was profit.) Interestingly enough, I believe I spent bidding the same amount that benefits the curators from the return— or that's the goal. Thus basically transferring my bid to additional curation rewards. If the total calculation of bids (not payout) is less than the curation reward payout, and the value of real votes exceeds the bot payout by 80%, it's less likely to be some kind of foul play.
In other words, high paying posts that get real votes from real people and whose bot use is negligible, where the actual payout after curation rewards is exceedingly more than they spent on the actual bids- are probably fine.
If you notice, most of the trending page abuse is dolphins and above. Hitting minnows who are just learning is very discouraging. I have pretty tough skin but I'm sure you don't want your bot to be counterproductive and scare away new users who are creating worthwhile content that gets genuinely rewarded.
It may also be worthwhile to consider the average payout of the last 10 posts. Usually, hardcore users consistently raise all of their posts to $100 or more. Those who are peer rewarded generally have a 1 or 2 high paying posts out of 10, the rest are getting $1-$10.
Just offering some ideas (take or leave) and thanks again for the congrats. ♥️
@bycoleman @transparencybot
Thank you again for your reply, you are making very valid arguments.
Keep in mind, the mission for transparency bot is to provide transparency to the network, not make judgements. As soon as I start judging who's post is worthy, it looses all value.
I am going to look into many of the things you have mentioned as they have merit.
Please see this list of abusers, and you will know why this bot is in action.
https://steemit.com/steemit/@bycoleman/bid-bot-activity-report-04-01-18-04-07-18-who-s-paying-the-most-to-promote-their-articles