RE: Steemit Bots and the value of
The problem with most bots is that the people behind it are only in it for the money and that they indeed upvote anything that is sent to them.
For the last week or so, I didn't use them, and it was shocking to see how small the amount generated by organic votes was...
I'll probably start using them again (if I manage to get up early enough, that is. In my experience, at 6 or 7 am GMT, the bigger part of the Steemians is asleep, and you have a bigger chance to actually make a profit.)
It'smore like a psychological thing: if I check http://steem.supply andI see there's some money on the way (like about $25/day - I'm not spending hundreds on bots), it somehow motivates me more than when it says there's $1/day on its way, even though I know I've probably paid for those $25 myself and there's big chance I lost money on it. Th mind is a strange thing, isn't it.
Once, I started to track my earnings and losses I made by using bots, but I stopped, because I didn't want to see those numbers - lol
@spiritualmax has conducted an experiment on the use of bots a couple of days ago. I think it's an interesting read:
My Bot vs No Bot Experience: The Conclusions
I can see the benefit to why people use bots, if even at a cost to themselves initially. The votes received to increase the power of the individuals' can be reclaimed later with some self-voting. Th reputation shoots up faster making the person appear more attractive to follow.
I also see that according to Steemit in their advertised FAQ that voting bots are classed as abuse, as they ask payment for a vote. When abuse is permitted to run rampant and free, the promotion of rivalry is amplified. At what point does abuse become a crime? I feel there is a greater positive outcome from no bots to the community, then bots offer.
There are more things of which the the FAQ stated its abuse, but which are blatantly ignored. An example of that is a required upvote for entering a contest.
The problem is that nobody really checks whether the rules are followed.
The harsh truth is that if you want to get your quality content seen, you have to play along...
Long term I think it will ruin the platform and devalue the currency. Leads to a platform where I will do what I like cause it is profitable.
I agree. It’s one of the many ways SteemIt is killing itself.
That’s why I want the Minnow Votes Project to succeed (if not this week, any of the following weeks), to show that it can be done without the bots...
Unfortunately, that method been used is a selfish one and not designed to promote newbies and assist them. It is designed around growing the creator. Providing a platform should not give entitlement to the major part of the profits, if that was the case we would earn less from our posts on Steemit. The use of the platform to boost other minnows would have a greater positive impact. The method being used is to promote the creator into a power position.
On the surface, it sounds great when you look deeper it is self-promotion. A greater attraction to taken part would be to ask all participant to write a pre-blog on a specific topic or from a pre-selected group of topics. the pre-log would be a paragraph or two of what they would like to address. The school can then choose one of these articles to promote from a second blog the creator does to list which will be upvoted on.
This method provides a much better interaction between all members of the group and provides an opportunity for a minnow to gain a jump start. As it is now, you have a creator and the administrator both been the same person. These two accounts along with two other family member accounts, return very little in votes to followers in comparison to what they receive and vote on each alternate account.
The goal is admirable. Any means to achieve a goal is not. If a user is seen to support other users projects and not their own goals. It shows more support of the community. As it stands it is the community supporting one user.
We might just have to agree we see this particular project differently.
No, I see what you mean. And I agree on the fact that the project is set up for personal gain - I’m completely aware of this. still, I think - or maybe I should say thought, ‘cos I started wondering these last couple of days - that there is a thing or two to learn from him.
Most definitely, I would be of the opinion the most foolish of us can ask more questions then the wisest can answer. but should your opinion differ from the creators. Your comments become flagged or downvoted if another has upvoted your comment. This I have knowledge of from the experience.
The my way or I beat you down with a red flag even tho you have supported and upvoted me in the past.
Does look too much like dictatorial leadership to me.
Saying all of that is against this particular project or more so the manner in which the project is performed. I did not unfollow either name and I will browse some posts now and then. My own interaction tho will be limited to viewing and the collection of information which may benefit me in future times, With receiving 4 or 5 downvotes which were provided to me by another, plus red flags to posts which had no votes, on a personal level I can not share my voting in that particular circle. It would be like rewarding him for a punishment on me for my view.
Wow, you seem to have informed yourself better than I did...