You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: How to "Delete" Steemit Posts + Idea Proposal for Returning "Lost Votes" to Curators/Bots Who Have Already Voted
What do you think about a proposal of removing rewards from voting... and move those funds to those who comments. Would you prefer more auto-upvotes or good and honest feedback about your work?
I prefer votes. I think that incentivization of only commentary would result in a lot of phony comments, to be honest. Though the vote system encouraged bot voting, I don't think this is destructive or counterproductive at the end of the day. Curators must first find blogs they trust and enjoy, and then check periodically so as to remain competitive in the Steem market in case said blogs begin putting out what the bot owner deems to be sub-par, non-lucrative content.
the problem is... that you can very easy automate for voting, but you cannot automate creation of meaningful and valuable responses.
Autoupvoting bots have nothing in common with actual good curation and I think your post is yet another proof for that.
I disagree. Steemit is essentially a free market, and if bots did not serve a meaningful purpose, no one would use them. Meaningless content and sub-par posts will eventually out themselves due to self-interested curators, who don't want to see the platform fail die to garbage rising to the top of the lists. If the platform fails, so do they, in essence.
Every automation has to be constantly monitored.
Without that, you will end up with posts like this, which did not have any value, but still end up with 120 votes, which some was given by wintesses.
If witnesses are not able to check whether their bot perform correctly, do you think others do it?
Other thing... that bots can be use for abuse. Greedy people just may want to use them in efficient for them but in harmful for community way , because they care only about personal profit, and they are no care about steemit in the long term.
Value is subjective and those participating in curation retain the right to use whatever methods they please.
There are many reasons people use bots to help them vote. Check out two great pieces on the topic here and here.
Steemit is an open-source, free market platform. You may want to regulate what people can and/or cannot do with their private resources, but that is not how a free market works.
Again, self-interested curators simply cannot succeed in the long run by placing bot votes on crap accounts.
Humans long for quality, and to reward quality. Individual actors are selfish. Bot-voting bullshit to the top of Steemit will eventually be detrimental to the bot voters themselves in the long run.
As I said, value is subjective. I have upvoted, personally, posts such as the one you referenced just for the value to the platform they bring in the form of information, coversation, and dialogue.
No value? Did you notice the dialogue the post generated in the comments? It cannot be said that the commentors do not hold it to have subjective value.
I agree 100% that this platform is about quality, and then actual readers and commentary are essential to its success.