You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The Dehumanizing Factor of Voting Bots
Agree 100%. Technically not so easy to ban bots though. I never used a bot, don't like the blind auto votes, although some of them give me some rewards on all my posts. But still, I would not mind when the stop auto voting. The big rewarded posts generally have also a much larger vote count than view count. Bots in action, but with some of the big SP holders behind I suppose.
I kind find the vote trails ok, this can be seen as an account giving some other account its SP to vote with. The loco of the train shall be manual curator though and preferable also read and comment.
Without the human factor it just becomes a game of investment where the high rollers dictate pretty much everything.
I agree and was in many discussion on no-bit versus other saying why they are good. cheetah and twitterbot are good. when using bots in a good way, eg filtering posts for manual curation, or even auto vote but later reading an unvoting when required...all good...I know accountholder who autovote but have no maximising revenue in mind, but do it to reward authors they really like and do not want to miss giving their rewards every post. also when bots are not there, the problem is still not solved completely. I think many of the larger SP holder vote randomly, or go in serie through the new channel without reading the posts. so yes, I'm in general against any bad use of bots, and if that means remove all bots, then lets do that....but technical this is very difficult, since bots can kind of behave like humans. now they may vote every couple of minutes, but when the system start looking at behaviours, bots can be made more like human voters...
So I think we need to fight for change of culture, we need to find ways to become more a community with most of the users have respect for eachother. In the end we can fight for things that are technically not possible, or very difficult, therefore will not be attended to in coming year(s) because of other priorities; Better is to work on the culture change we need to have.
The delay on voting should be much greater if you ask me. At least two minutes. This will also give the opportunity to curators to vote for comments or write themselves one.
We have 20 second delay. Even when delay is set to 5 minutes. Then bots can vote each 5th minute. Not an issue to configure a bot like that. You will remove the 1% and 0,1% bot voters, but many of the bot voters are not adotping such strategy.
Bots should be banned in my opinion. The limitation could come as a prerequisite for someone to post a meaningful comment in order for the vote to count. No comment, no voting reward. This will also increase engagement.
Good suggestion, but also difficult to keep in hand. A bot can create a response message/comment. When they do this with std message and when detected that somehow is blocked, then bots become smarter and have a DB full of comments of which they are picking randomly.
The only way to stop bots is to ID every user! And have a police force being able to chk up their setup at whatever place they run their operations from.
I'm not an engineer, but this is my logic!
Maybe a smart contract within Steemit can help the situation. I hope @dantheman can offer some suggestions?
Dan is not here anymore, he is with EOS. Smart contract without enforcement, not sure how that works... too many Steemians do not like enforcement. Dan even goes as far as an agreement you have to follow, no active enforcement through non technical channels. Idealistic view far from what the reality is.