RE: Why don't I upvote some people's content (anymore), even if I like it?
I think this is an honorable yet ineffective approach. We have to take a look at why vote bots exist in the first place.
They exist because the primitive Steemit trending tab is easily exploited by them. Simply pay for votes and you get more exposure on the site.
I've done a lot of experimenting with buying votes. I bought votes for exposure and I bought votes to manipulate the way curation is distributed. Maybe you noticed that I would pump a post after you upvoted it. I was trying to give my organic followers an artificial curation bonus.
Now that @smartsteem is getting a bit greedier there is no reason for me to continue to buy votes. The margins are razor thin. It's also nice when I don't have to look at a big payout and wonder how much (if any) of that is even profit.
When it really comes down to it the only way to truly stop vote buying is to fix the way users experience content on Steemit. We need better filters and custom trending tabs.
I've also dabbled with the idea of creating a decentralized network of vote buying/selling to undercut everyone else. Anyone would be able to sell their vote for any value. It would be a free market of supply/demand. This would likely create a race to the bottom where vote bots would no longer be making a profit because everyone could choose to be their own vote bot.
I'd really like to punish all the devs who put all those hours into exploiting the system... but I'm sure you can see how that would be hypocritical unless I could get it programmed relatively quickly.
Advanced custom trending tabs are the real way to kill bit-bots. I need to learn JavaScript, Node.js, and Chrome Extensions before I can make any headway here though.
Change the way the trending page is coded then. Simple. That's not a validation for buying votes. As for ineffective, it is effective. Bidbots stop and people return to curating for curation rewards to reward others with upvotes, when people stop using bidbots, and other people can apply voluntary removal of support to facilitate that change. There is no negative flagging of taking away rewards. It's a removal of support, not upvoting.
People can get rewarded and whales can vote for people to get curation rewards. Right now, whales get a double return, one for curation, and two for selling their votes. Curation alone wasn't good enough for them, gotta play people on psychological grounds of fame and popularity to buy votes and make the rich richer...
Trending should change, why hasn't it? Is it so damn hard? No, it's a bit of a change to the way something is displayed... yet it hasn't been done... So the people in the community need to egnage in behavior themselves to change things, since Steemit Inc won't try to a simple change to see if it can change the motivation of users.
I'm not trying to validate anything. I simply think bid-bots were born because of a flaw in the system. A flaw that needs to get fixed.
If you tell me I should never buy another vote then that's what I'll do. It's totally against the spirit of the entire platform and proof-of-brain.
Unfortunately, this is an issue of statistics. You can't expect everyone to engage in the honor system. There will always be bad actors. That's why development needs to be done to directly attack the bots.
Changing the trending... I don't see it happening. I've said it before. It would require stinc to choose side. Choose against the profit of the biggest accounts. I don't see that happening, they don't have the balls. It's easier to hide behind neutrality. And saying that steemit is just an interface. If there is a need someone else can do it. That kind of lame excuses. I'm sure for our community we will be going for a steemstem approach.