RE: A case for autovoters
You're comparing self sacrificing of a patronage to Voting on Steem where you don't sacrifice anything.
What are you talking about no self-sacrifice? I am yet to use a steem of what I have earned here regardless of my real world position and have distributed a hell of a lot more than many other other people who have earned more in much easier ways then myself. It is fine for those without SP to be on a high horse but when it comes to distribution, it is the people with SP who are doing it.
automation has no place in social interactions
voting isn't a social act, it is a transaction.
You have no qualms about brushing aside the fact that by not voting you give others a chance to share more of the rewards, it's petty and selfish.
Ah, you mean leave the pool completely to the bidbots? Interesting method for helping content producers there.
I'm talking about the curation rewards that invalidate any kind of talk about self sacrificing, capiche?
And you still equate a reward with self sacrificing, so Phleaze stop acting as if Curation isn't it's own reward even without curation rewards or dare to claim that because others abuse the system you're any better by condoning absurdity of automating a freely given resource as if it's "wasted" in turn diminishing the reward pool because of the idiocy of "I don't need to consider every single thing I curate".
That's why this conversation is going nowhere because you've no regard for curation as, well, curation and the ecosystem of Steem to you exists in the absence of social media, such as social interactions, IE curation, is merely a faceless accounting function.
Of course you, who equates donating and patronage to Curating, did exactly what I expected, which was brush off the issue aside as if I insinuated, let alone voiced anything about allowing bid bots to rape the pool. Tell me again, what we're your thoughts on the whale experiment? Self sacrifice means using all your voting Power to squash bid bots, direct action.
The people with High Sp are the only ones capable of squashing that abuse, so here's a few thoughts on the positive aspects of automation, in the realm of cold accounting and profit maximizing, errmm instead of outright using bid bots..
Automate your downvotes.
yeah this is going nowhere however,
@smooth's and @abit' s whale experiment was run before bidbots entered into the marketplace. It was before HF19 and was used to cancel out whale votes over a certain threshold. I know this because they both flagged my largest ever post at the time (something like 20 dollars) which had received a vote from @thejohalfiles. I didn't know about the experiment until this point but once I worked out what was going on, I left a message of support for them.
When it comes to curation reward, since there are much higher value ways to earn, there is an opportunity cost in not using them but the cost to community is an even narrower distribution. As far as charity is concerned, at least in most countries there is a tax rebate available on the donation, I guess you could equate that to curation return too?
As far as I am concerned, I support people who support the community more heavily than those who don't and, if someone thinks similarly to me but is unwilling or unable to distribute their value themselves, I say automate it, trail a curator who finds value, use it in some way.
And btw, I don't automate my own vote, I have cast 38,000 manually and distributed something of financial value to many, many people over the last year and a half because, I have a long-term view of the platform and I act according to that view. You might have other ideas but, attempting to make ideas a reality takes more than words.
There is no such thing as a selfless act, there is always a return of some kind which means no matter the sacrifice, something is gained back.
So you saw the value of keeping the reward distribution in the hands of many as opposed to the few, yet if you have people sweating over their "wasted sp" and treating the "game" as "real life dude!" it festers the same attitude that makes people use bid bots, don't you think, in effect "milking" the cow, yeah they might "support" but can you call that curation?
This is akin to one step forward and two steps backwards because again it's another milking the cow attitude, yeah a user is getting built but at the cost of everyone else and we know how curation trails are the circlejerk of bidbots and voturbation dressed up.
There's no such thing as a selfish act, no matter what is gained it all has to be abandoned eventually.
Automate downvoting, stop fretting over "wasted SP", the rewards ought to be distributed by consideration after the content is consumed and the attention is given, anything else is spreadshits.
you assume that all users bring the same value to the community? That is a pretty big call.
Nonsense. This depends on who is chosen as the manual curator. You seem to assume the worst in all people, perhaps it is reflective?
Again, this is BS. someone can offer a great deal to the community but it is offered to people who can't afford to maintain that person. They still need to eat but their content might be utterly useless to me personally. I want them to keep helping people so, once I have made the decision they bring value, I will support them even if I don't read their content.
Why? I simply meant that those shares could be distributed by others, who are doing the consideration and giving the attention you cannot.
It's inconsequential what I assume since the point was that automation of the function is the extension of the same attitude of "my VP is wasted, must maximize profits", no matter how dressed up, how much innuendo of respectability it's veiled in, the end result is always taking from the many, a attitude of scarcity over a renewable resource, it's not healthy, and the proof is in the pudding, what Curation trail are you following? Which manual curator can consume and curate more than someone with zilch sp?
No, that is the epitome of BS, because everyone has the same amount of attention, more or less, and ultimately this turned from Curation to "supporting " the person, milking the cow attitude, the innuendo of the greed pathology.
You're conflicted over supporting everyone, more or less, but then what is Curation and attention and Social Media?
Ergo the attitude of milking the cow, maximizing profits (to support those poor kids that I don't even value what they offer, I value their "presence").
profits for who? me? This is about distribution.
this makes no sense to me.
This isn't social media.
You seem to know me so well. It is amazing.
It doesn't matter how much SP you hold, you, me and everyone else is given the exact same amount of attention to spend every day, and nobody's day is one nanosecond more than anyone else's.
Well, actually this is not true in the physical sense due to a host of reasons as ones potential for focus or attention is not the same as another's and the skill one holds means one can potentially move faster than another and in being able to cover more distance, effectively stretch time. As someone once said, time is relative.
But, even if it is true, it isn't the resources one has, it is how one uses them. You use yours the best way you know how, I use mine the best way I know how which means, we are both maximizers by default driven by our desires. You seem to think you are doing a good job of using the resources available to you, I seem to think I am. But, if you are trying to convince me otherwise, your approach isn't working.
First one is a ridicule behind the attitude of milking the 🐮.
What is it if it's not a social media site?
Wait, did you take that as an assessment of your character? If it's valid then feel free to address that.
it is many things for many people. you might see it as a social media site, I do not, that is just one facet of it.