Is this really spam?
I've got a question here, look at the following comments (they belong to another person's post):
Do you think what @blurrylens posted is spam? He's not asking for anything, he makes a nice comment and yet @steemcleaners is actually threatening with action by cheetah bot, better said he is going to get flagged.
But what I really don't like is apparently @steemcleaners is now using comments to upvote him or herself. Do you think this is right? Threatening someone and taking monetary advantage of this threat? Looks like we are acting like street gangs now. Now I don't know what @blurrylens intentions are, but if they are going to threaten someone because they "think" he is doing something, we are seriously screwed here.
Upvoted because you bring up a point of debate and have a good rep, but it's definitely spam when you post the same thing on virtually every post you see. It adds no value.
See the comments:
https://steemit.com/@blurrylens/comments
Also, just to add on to your second point re: payouts, I upvote my own content all the time without prejudice, and @steemcleaners provides a pretty good service.
They downvoted a few posts of mine when I was copying and pasting the entire article, but when I switched to summaries and added more commentary, I've received no more compliants or downvotes. I didn't agree with it, but it didn't cripple me either.
Just post good, unique stuff and you'll be in good shape. Don't copy and paste the same comment or one-liners. IMO, it is spam.
Why would copying my own comment be spam? Can I plagiarize myself? That would be new one for me, and what he does is just put the same comment he's not asking for an up vote or a follow, maybe he's not that good at writing because he does post articles mostly with pictures of flowers.
Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear - I was just talking in generalities and wasn't saying you were spamming or plagiarizing at all (at least I think that's what you thought I was saying?)
IMO, copying and pasting that same one-line comment over and over again is totally spam: Really? EVERY photo s/he commented on has "awesome composition?" S/he can't make any other comments about what makes it a good photo, what s/he liked about it, etc?
Just because he's not asking for an upvote or follow doesn't mean it's not spam, but like you said below, I guess it's in the eye of the beholder.
Well I guess everyone has his point of view, I'm just expressing my own, I know you are in your right to think as you do, as for the self up voting I think steemcleaners is a bot why should he or she or it be programmed to up vote his own comments? You are a person you can decide for yourself whether or not to do it and I can respect whatever decision you make but not from a bot.
Yeah the self upvoting thing for a bot is a bit more questionable, I admit, though I'm throwing stones from glass houses cause I upvote my own stuff all the time. But all my posts are excellent and deserve my upvote. I might be a little biased though. :-)
As for @steemcleaners, I'm not totally sure on this, but I think it's part-bot and part-manual. The self-upvote from @steemcleaners is automatic I think, but the upvotes from @adm come manually. I think people report links to a chat group and then it triggers a review and action by the bot if it's deemed to be spam, plagiarism, etc. If @cheetah responds to you repeatedly, I also think it causes a trigger to their systems.
(Not saying I agree with it, just explaining how I think it works, but I could be wrong.)
Yup, we can all have our point of view, I've enjoyed the debate immensely, I'm interested to see what other people think about it.
This comment has received a 3.13 % upvote from @drotto thanks to: @trending.
I've been saying that bots are bad for steemit for a long time.
I know you're anti-bot, but someone spamming this kind of shit on every post needs a swift kick in the ass somehow. That said, I don't love the centralized policing angle either, it would be nice if downvoting worked a little better than it does.
Everitt is right bots suck, as for spam, there is no definition of spam, apparently it is what each person decides it is.
According to Wikipedia: Electronic spamming is the use of electronic messaging systems to send an unsolicited message (spam), especially advertising, as well as sending messages repeatedly on the same site.
Sorry...I had to... :-)
(Yes, yes, I know Wikipedia is not the end-all, be-all. I'm just being a smartass.)
But isn't the trick not to cite Wikipedia, but to cite who they referenced???
c;
Something interesting I've noticed. Many people on Steemit comment with this type of style and attitude. In my online school, half of my classmates say "Good post!" without furthering any type of discussion as well. If you can read a comment and have no single idea what the main post could be about, then that comment serves no purpose except that they saw and liked what you wrote.
Another important thing to remember is that many people here do not have English as their native tongue, so how they are able to express themselves is also limited. I've had many friends on other social media that first appear to be bots. -But they were actual people struggling with the vocabulary of another language the more I learned.
Yes, it is spam.
To get a better notion of how bad it is, read 10 of this account's comments:
https://steemit.com/@shencoin
Boy, you've been here a few days, and already you know more than I do, you're going to do great here.
Steemit gets a little douchy with its obsession to put distance between whales and the average joe.