You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Steem experiment: Burn post #1
I submit flagging based on rewards being too high for a post to be just as Marxist as putting a cap on the post earnings. You can take an extreme situation where the user posts "Horay It's Saturday" and is obviously upvoting himself through bots but often I read about flagging when clearly that is not at all the case.
I agree with your view. Having the possibility to self-vote in the system is indefensible, I cannot think of a single good reason why it's useful. And I try to explain here how flagging based on rewards could do more harm than good.
sorin.cristescu: "the possibility to self-vote in the system is indefensable"
The comment then voted up $0.77 by a voting bot. Do you expect me to believe you didn't pay that voting bot to update your comment? This makes me smile. I'll vote it up too.
This is how @gentlebot works. It randomly upvotes people. One cannot buy a vote from it.
Well, believe it or not, I didn't pay that bot and have no idea who paid it. I don't know anything about @gentlebot. Shouldn't you be able to see on the blockchain if I paid for it ? Or maybe, by looking at timestamp, even what other account paid for it ?
I do use self-votes myself when I deem that the effort I've put into writing a comment deserves a payout, even small, and am not sure anyone else will upvote my comment. I've also used minnowbooster to indirectly pay random user to upvote my comments. Overall you may say that I'm experimenting with the Steemit system, taking it out for a ride.
The fact that I've tested features and decided to use some because it's how the system, in its current state, is supposed to be used, doesn't imply that I believe all its features to be good. :-)