RE: A look at transparency and hiding beneath the surface
It commented on one of my posts that had been botted with 3 different bots and had reached above 50.
I replied to the bot that it took me 2 weeks to gather the information, more than 2 days in drafting it and about 3 hours in transforming the document to a steemit ready blog post.
At first I was a bit peeved that it appeared in my post and although it had part of its blurb that it was not judging the content of my post but was just pointing out the use of bots.
The bids I used are very small and only contributed 1/4 of the post. Most of it had come from other users and people who saw the value of my post (it was about witnesses)
Was I wrong to use bots for some form of visibility on a tag I don't think so.
I had proposed to bid-bot owners the idea of having manual eyes take a look at bids that are 20 dollars or more in order to make sure that what trended are not shit posts. Their should be a more regulated use of bots and people realize its proper use.
Am I against a stop of bots in general not at this point because the platform is still changing and with changes it can either be good or bad but we know things will change with hivemind and communities.
Again, as much as I would love to see 'all organic' I am not naive. The current system is just not tenable in the long-term or for a healthy community platform. The problem with manual curators is they need to be paid and that eats profits because they can't be coded into the 'law'.
My worry is it will just hide the issues, out of sight, out of mind.
I am open to many variations and suggestions but its current form is harming more than the pool, it is taking away the connections and engagement necessary to build a community in its foundational stages. Even if it distributes Stem, what will the community be filled with guitar guys?