Gypsy Discussions #4 –- do we need more control or regulation on businesses on steemit ?
Hi Friends,
for my new project @minnowhelp I started to test performances of upvote offers ( randowhale, booster,..) here on steemit. Actually I started with the @booster service and looked inside a bit.
You can find their statement about service posted eight days ago here!
While everybody is cheering, I actually wondered about the spongy information :)
- If unable to vote, I refund (I do that automatically, cool huh?)
So I sent a message over asking
“what means if you are unable to vote ? Can you please make clear ! Unable because of what ? Technical problems or just not enough spend money by the users ?”
--> no answer ( that’s uncool huh )
While I tracked @booster bids and performance first time I noticed that there was not coming the upvote run for at least 4 hours, which confused me as they state in their statement- what should be kinda terms of agreements - that they will run every 2.4 hours ?!
I think:
- If a regular business outside of steemit announce something and not do, the business will get problems
- If a regular business outside of steemit gives an offer and people take this offer, than these have to DELIVER !
- Let’s compare with an auction: They STATE a minimum bid if they need. If there is NO MINUMUM BID, all bids HAVE TO BE ACCEPPTED
I hope @booster will finally answer to this questions here and I will point out, that this is just one example and I think in general we have to think about some kind of regulation and controll of businesses within steemit !
What do you think ?
Should we have more control or regulation on businesses here on offer on steemit ?
IF YOU LIKE
upvote/ resteem/follow me on @digital-gypsy
Thanks
Gypsy
I understand your concerns because at first i felt them too, it is frustrating sometimes and even more for us who are still minnows but i also think that regulation is not the answer, the decentralized perspective of all of this projects is what i think gives them value at first, and while they're not forced to be as clear as something regulated, i do think that we, as customers, are forced to do our homework and be very careful of everything we put our money in. I believe in the dynamics of the free market, and even more in this community who are helpful, well informed and highly educated, the information spread fast and if a service are not giving what they're announcing people just turn into another that would, it's not an easy process but eventually the market keeps what is worth keeping and wipe out what is not.
Now, i just changed the way i see all these services as @booster, @randowhale, @minnowbooster, because if you think that you're gonna start earning like a whale because of them, well you're not. Most of the money you see in the post after a boost is your own money, taking into account the devaluation of the posts and the split of the revenue with curation. My personal opinion is that i prefer @randowhale because of the "clarity" of the game rules, at least you know that the vote is random so you can't make high expectations, well i think you shouldn't. With booster even though i still use it i've seen that the bid windows that are very liquid with high bids are perfectly on time, but the ones with fewer bids when you know you can get a nice percentage of vote with relatively small investment, they're the ones that get delayed or "unable to vote". So as a customer i know what to expect now and the risk that are in front of me, but i'm sure as hell that if some other service appear, and they're alike i wouldn't think a second of turning to them.
Right know i use all those boosters really mostly for the reputation the votes gives me, the satisfaction of seeing some money in posts that you know are worth (even if its your own money lol), and because if you are lucky enough you can earn a few more cents, see it as a ROI.
Sorry for the long comment, i really wanted to do something like this in a post of my own but well this was an opportunity to share my thoughts about this topic, my advice to you is that believe in the market, and that means believing in your fellow steemians, this people worth it and i know that if someone are coming here to scam us, we're all gonna wipe them out of the market.
Have a great day and keep steeming good!
This comment has received a 0.20 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @erodriguezc11.
I think we need regulations
the market regulates
This comment has received a 0.17 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @digital-gypsy.
Unfortunately, there's no way to regulate third-party services like these. (That's why the blockchain technology is aiming for "decentralized" systems) But I do understand your point for security and customer satisfaction. There may be delays or technical issues with their service application but I think they're aiming for good customer satisfaction.
I think they should do as announced. If they are not able to do or no want ( what is okay ) they should announce the new terms of agreement. Unable to vote is just a phrase without any concrete message. If they are unable to take my bid, they also should refund immediately and not 3h later !
This comment has received a 0.17 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @digital-gypsy.
Hi @digital-gypsy
A good topic. I think that the market will sort all of this out. This system was built on free market principles, and while it may take some time, everything will sort itself out. Some people inevitably get burned when they are the test subject for a new product. Think DDT.
There isn't much to say to those people, other than "Buyer beware", "thanks for at least letting the rest of us know about it."
From what I've seen of the @booster crowd, they genuinely want to make something that works well - that makes them money, and which gives good (worthwhile) upvotes to their customers.
I think it will all work out, but the only way for these bots to develop is for us to provide them with feedback.
"From what I've seen of the @booster crowd, they genuinely want to make something that works well - that makes them money, and which gives good (worthwhile) upvotes to their customers."
i think that together is not possible. And its fine for me, if they just do their business. But I want clear statements and rules. And if I state rules than I have to deliver. Thats my point !
yes, i hear you. But the word "should" has no bearing here. The market will sort it out, sooner or later. My bet is that it will be sooner, because this is the fastest social network there is. Bad reputations spread faster than wildfire, and when people complain, it behooves them to listen.
:)
This comment has received a 0.17 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @digital-gypsy.
I don't think we need regulations, all you need is a customer review site, either part of steemit or an external website where users can rate businesses that provide a service and take steem/steem dollars as payment. The users nor the business would be able to lie about their reviews because you can look at the blockchain and what transactions occurred between the two. So before anyone wants to use one of these services they can check the reviews of other users to see if it is worth it.
interesting yes, thats a good point. Thanks for that !
This comment has received a 0.17 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @digital-gypsy.
Your article has been re-steemed and upvoted by @steemhelper , great article! Keep up writing quality content like this.
do you also want to get your great content resteemed if it is good enough? Check the link below:
https://steemit.com/introduceyourself/@steemhelper/introduction-steemhelper-link-to-initiatives-weekly-2
Please recommend this initiative to your friends.
Thanks ! That makes me feel better..
@steemhelper please tell me how i can get a boost
I do not speak English and use a standard Google translator. I understood what you mean. But I think that each side will have its pros and cons. I can not say with certainty how to do what would be good for everyone. I do not have enough knowledge to solve such issues. But the question is very interesting. Now I myself am interested in knowing what other people think. Thank you for sharing this article :) You are interesting to read. Follow you :)
The problem is, you can announce here what you want, but even if you announce and not deliver, you cant do anything. Thats why I think some kind of regulations need to be implemented !
This comment has received a 0.17 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @digital-gypsy.
See it might not vote for 4 or 5 hours but then it votes two batches together..It processes votes in batches..So you will get your vote..It sends back the sbd if your bid is too small..because it cant vote you 0 cents..
I see. Fine ! My question:
Where this terms of agreements ( not vote for 4 or 5 hours but then it votes two batches together, It sends back the sbd if your bid is too small ) are published ?
Its not.But its also mentions that its in testing or beta..So those are the things they might work one..The service is not up to the mark..But as far as i have seen they have never cheated or defaulted..
Hmm the complete discussion goes somewhere, where i actually did not wanted it to go..LOL
I am more concerned about the non regulation stuff. I not say Booster is cheating. But ie I say, when they say they are unable to vote, it is not the fully truth :) Thats why I asked for detailed infos and not got them. Beta is for me not an excuse. If I do offer a service and take the money of my costumer I have to deliver the product. If I cant make sure ( because beta ) I do not offer !!
they are testing..that means that use their service knowing that you might experience bad service at times..it is just by trying and testing they can become better..Yes they dont give the exact reason of why they wer unable to vote..So what we can do is request them to give a reason in the memo while refunding the sbd
This comment has received a 0.17 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @digital-gypsy.
This comment has received a 0.17 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @digital-gypsy.
I have used booster a lot. At first you could even send it to comments. This was used so much by some with so little amounts, that the bot was forced to upvote much longer than anticipated. It also drained the bots voting power more than it should have because it forced the bot to do the smallest upvote possible which still generated WAY more than the bid was, irrelavant of all the other bids. Normally the 2.4 hours would have sufficed to recharge to 100% but with hundreds of comments squeezed into a cycle that didn't work out anymore. I think they changed the rules because all comment upvotes have been returned recently.
Hi flauwy - if they changed the rules, do you know where this new rules are published ? I did not see
Me neither. I have just observed what happened.
Thats actually my point. Its business. They do offer something and just not deliver if people take the offer ? And they not even publish a post, saying we change our terms of agreement. That must be regulated in my eyes !
This comment has received a 0.17 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @digital-gypsy.
This comment has received a 0.17 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @digital-gypsy.
La verdad no entiendo muy de lo que hablan, disculpen mi ignorancia