Steemit Voting-Bot Users: Is It Time To Review & Update Our Lists...?

in #steemit3 years ago (edited)

Bots. Love 'em or hate 'em.

I've been the blessed recipient of having my account put on a bot list, autovoting my posts up in value - for which I've been incredibly grateful. And, I've used the bots to automate my own account's curation.

And having been on both sides and through a couple experiences lately that I'll go into here, I'd like to create this opportunity to encourage others using bots - whether the public service at SteemVoter or others - to reassess who is on their list and whether the quality of their most recent of their posts has justified keeping all users on their lists.

And I'll confess, this story comes about because I myself slacked off and didn't do this.

It started one random day when the infamous whale, @berniesanders, left a comment on one of my stories moreless threatening to flag my posts into oblivion if I didn't stop voting for @mindhunter's "bullshit" content.

A bit hard-handed. But nonetheless, I wasn't about to start a war over the matter. So I removed the account from my SteemVoter list.

Now, I must also confess that I first put the account on my list simply for profit-based reasons.

I'd been using SteemVoter less, instead testing out @biophil's bot - and one day upon comparing rewards results with the others using the bot, discovered that one of them was earning significant rewards consistently voting on @mindhunter's content. So, I followed suit - without giving much diligence into the quality of his posts. And as time went by, I didn't bother to check up on what I was autovoting on. Mistake.

After bending to @berniesanders' less-than-diplomatic request, I checked out why he felt so strongly so as to issue this 'threat' and call @mindhunter's content bullshit. Here, I discovered he was in the right. And I was in the wrong to have abused my account's power.

The content was shit. Like, real shit.

It may have not been "nice" the way I was faced with the choice of stopping voting for such bullshit or face a heavy penalty, but I deserved it. My integrity had been out. Using my voting power in such a way was not serving the platform. And perhaps, I needed such a wake-up call to realize my strategy was not in the best interest of the community, and I'd been setting a fine example of the type of behavior this community doesn't need.

Story number two:

I'd first discovered @dana-edwards on Facebook prior to his arrival on Steemit, and had always been wowed with the level of intelligence and insight in his writing.

Here, he didn't disappoint either. There were several of his early articles that blew my mind with their brilliance, and I was happy to put him on my SteemVoter list to compensate for the incredible quality of content he'd been providing to the community. (Though I did later take him off, in order to allocate my voting power via @biophil's bot.)

Well, over the past few weeks, as I saw new posts of his here and there, I've been disappointed.

The long, deep, thorough, insightful masterpieces he once produced have come few and far between. Meanwhile, he's still been earning decent rewards for posting incredibly short questions and quotations from different news sources.

Now, this is no debate on the fairness of rewards or what is and isn't valuable to those in this community. Of course, value is subjective. Everyone has their own tastes. And everyone exercises their voting power differently.

However, I've felt a bit twisted up to see a brilliant guy (or lady?)like Dana go from consistently contributing some of the most genius content on Steemit, to stuff that seems way dumbed-down, has such little time or effort put into it, and yet is still being rewarded quite unproportionately to the depth/superficiality in it.

Don't get me wrong - I don't share this as any sort of grievance or complaint.

I do share it as a reference for reflection.

It is possible that many who placed @dana-edwards on their SteemVoter (or other bot) lists once did so because they too loved his rich, long, intellectual content - and have not kept up-to-date to see what they've been auto-voting is not anywhere near the same calibre as what got him on their lists in the first place.

I still got respect for the guy. Though there's no way I would use my voting power to support the rewards he's been getting for posting what he has been lately, despite the account once being what I once considered one of the most deserving.

(And maybe my sense of disappointment or being twisted up about this is merely cause for reflection on whether my strategy is due for a reassessment and change. Perhaps there is some jealousy at people earning more while putting in far less work - though that could be a reality to face that maybe the "market" wants something different than what I've been offering).

Two stories. One moral.

With voting, comes responsibility.

Each vote is a show of support for what type of content we'd like to see more of here - what type of content adds exceptional value to the minds and lives of readers and makes this a more powerful community with a solid foundation of the type of substance-rich content needed to help Steemit grow sustainably.

Bots can be a great tool for automating votes for users we recognize produce consistently excellent content and feel they're an asset to the community.

Though the use of such a tool isn't one that is set-and-forget.

As I hope was clear from the point of these two stories, using a bot does come with the responsibility of keeping an eye on what it's voting on to ensure those who were fortunate to get on our lists are weilding their power responsibly by continuing to contribute the quality of content that got them on in the first place.


I love that you share openly, compassionate humility and precision about your experience using bots. Even more so, the moral of the story as you so succinctly report "With voting, comes responsibility." definitely goes in accordance with my experience as a voter. I keep and eye on people who consistently bring about quality and haven't yet been taken for a ride... I cross my finger on this one but, of course for human reasons, the odds are always going to be there.

I wish you the best with your reassignment of bots and a profound thank you for exposing this situation to the rest of the big names out here as it does need exposure and rectification.

Namaste :)

Well said brother~

I noticed the exact same thing regarding Dana's content... and it is not the first time I have seen a previously respectable Steemian doing something that could be a bit sketchy.

To be fair, Dana is not actively breaking rules. I would not flag their account - but I did unfollow after I felt like it wasn't the kind of content that I wanted to engage with.

There was another user who I noticed doing something similar... one I had a lot of respect for.. and it really disappointed me.

Lastly, thank you for sharing your story about realizing you made a mistake with mindhunter. It takes courage to admit when you've done something wrong. It seems unfortunate that Steem's curation system encourages people to follow the herd and rush in to vote any content that will get money - regardless of the quality of that content.

I always encourage users, new and old, to just curate based on quality. The real rewards come from content creation and engaging with the community, NOT scavenging for dust from curation rewards.

re: flagging... yeah. I do disagree with the rewards, feeling they've been inproportional to the quality of content. However, it's a tough grey area determining when it may be appropriate to use the flagging power for such a purpose.

Thanks for bringing that up, as that was one point I wanted to touch on in the story but forgot.

And your welcome. Courage and some humility. But, we all make mistakes from time to time. And I'd rather suck it up and admit mine like this to set an example and pay forward the lessons, because it is a valuable lesson for the community and those using bots. Standards need to be set, and sometimes fucking up is a necessary part of the process of raising them - but if we keep our mistakes to ourselves, there's bound to be others who make the same fuckups, thus doing more damage to the community, when such could be avoided by simply swallowing one's pride and vocalizing as an example to others of what not to do. Not everyone might read or take such lessons to heart and implement themselves, but if even one or two do, the community will have upgraded because of it...

every time I look at dana's blog, I am scratching my head... there is a disconnect between content and rewards

i made the same mistake expt of course with significantly less power but the conclusion is the same thanks for reminding me to reevaluate my voting bots

I would love so much to know how to automate my own curation.

The @OriginalWorks bot has determined this post by @rok-sivante to be original material and upvoted it!

To call @OriginalWorks, simply reply to any post with @originalworks or !originalworks in your message!

To nominate this post for the daily RESTEEM contest, upvote this comment! The user with the most upvotes on their @OriginalWorks comment will win!

For more information, Click Here!

This comment has received a 8.33 % upvote from @nettybot thanks to: @stimialiti.

Send 0.100 SBD to @nettybot with a post link in the memo field to bid on the next vote.

Oh, and be sure to vote for my owner, @netuoso, as Steem Witness

Have a great day!

This comment has received a 4.24 % upvote from @buildawhale thanks to: @stimialiti. Send at least 0.100 SBD to @buildawhale with a post link in the memo field to bid for a portiona of the next 100% upvote.

To support our curation initiative, please vote on my owner, @themarkymark, as a Steem Witness

It sounds like the moral of the story is to NOT use bot voting because you are more likely to wind up voting on SHIT because you're not actually "curating", you're simply trying to earn profit based on a specific author's past work.

There's a saying that goes something like: Past performance is not an indicator of future success.

This is why I feel strongly that any voting bot is actually not in the best interest of the future success of Steemit. The reason curation rewards exist are for quality content to be raised to the greater community, NOT for profit.

Curation rewards are not meant to be a giant whale circle jerk. By not ACTIVELY curating posts, you are doing a disservice to the Entire Steemit Community.

Sure, auto vote bots may have worked when the community was smaller. There were fewer authors to choose from. It makes sense that you would auto vote the best / most consistent ones and manually curate the one-off posts that you enjoyed.

But the environment has changed. And you must adapt appropriately in order to ensure the future success of the platform.

Please end the Circle Jerk of whales who post ANYTHING and receive literally HUNDREDS of high-valued SteemPower votes. Regardless of the quality of their content.

All this action does is encourage new users to "follow suit" because "that's the way Steemit must work if everyone who is successful is doing it."

Please stop the madness.

when will we (humans) learn that everything shouldn't be outsourced to robots and algorithms? Love your assessment of the problem.

Thank you for your comment. While you're on the right track, the problem isn't actually "algorithms". If someone instituted a legitimate AI algorithm, I bet it wouldn't be so bad.

However, outsourcing to a mindless robot that simply votes for the same author over and over (mindlessly), is absolutely not going to work in the long-term. It's barely a short-term solution for a complex growth proposition.

Just for the record...




Great post my mannn! Every Sunday, I go to check my steemvoter account. I usually catch a few people who were doing great content, then decided to do like 10+ shit posts a day.

You just made me go back to my account and now I want to go through everyone's accounts 😂

What's that saying?

"With Great Power Comes With Greater Responsibility"


Congratulations @rok-sivante, this post is the third most rewarded post (based on pending payouts) in the last 12 hours written by a Superhero or Legend account holder (accounts hold greater than 100 Mega Vests). The total number of posts by Superhero and Legend account holders during this period was 17 and the total pending payments to posts in these categories was $850.72. To see the full list of highest paid posts across all accounts categories, click here.

If you do not wish to receive these messages in future, please reply stop to this comment.

@rok-sivante excuse me ,was an mistake . I begin to learn the Steemit rules and I'll promise to do the right things , no spam only good comments and activity . Now I fallen from 42 level to 8 , I learned my lesson . Never make again .

Now how I can grow my same level like first , now I'm 8 :( ,thank you

four of the exact same comments, and 8 in total were unnecessary. ONE is all that was needed.

you're back at a 40. 2 points is quite a reasonable price for the lesson you got today. ;-)

I have yet to use bots but I am pretty sure I have a couple that I am on their list judging by regular votes, (not complaining at all) that I get.

This also is VERY important for other aspects of the ecosystem as well, like witnesses. People really should take time to re-evaluate their witness votes, or at least check in on them at @netuoso's STEEM Witness Stats site.

I really want to contribute more and better written blogs but I'm not really a writer even though I'm trying. This also explains why I see so many blogs that are just plain boring or not well written getting hundreds of dollars. I'm affraid if I write what I am thinking and believe nobody will take interest. I need think and be able to research more so I can contribute more on this platform.

I'm affraid if I write what I am thinking and believe nobody will take interest.

well, even if that were the case, nothing was lost but your time - or you could reframe that as an investment in building your skill and receiving feedback.

I need think and be able to research more so I can contribute more on this platform.

there are many different ways to contribute. everybody has their own unique talents and viewpoints. maybe more research could help you put together something of greater value to contribute to this platform. Or maybe no research at all might be required at all, just action in starting where you're at and writing, even if it's not the best. with practice, you'll get better. and if you enjoy the process, that is its own reward.

do check out some of the info in this curation post I put together a while ago, as it's quite dense in some great pointers that may be of value as you venture forward here:

The Dirty Dozen: My Top 12 Most HIGHLY Recommended Posts For Steemit Noobs To Accelerate Your Success...


Thank you for responding. I really didn't think it would get a response. I will take your advice to heart. Thanks again.

Thanks for another honest and valuable post. This without a doubt something that MANY people need to check especially anyone with lots of voting power. There is a LOT of great content getting under rewarded and lots of mediocre content being over rewarded.

Full Steem Ahead!

it is hard to maintain motivation to write long posts when rewards maybe less than a dollar -- i try hard with some of my posts and others not so much, but i can never tell if anything will gain an amount of votes. Anyway , i will remotivate and write one of my better efforts again for the next .. rock on

Yeah, I've got to review my SteemVoter list as well. Most of my people are consistent posters of quality (most of the time) but they don't get much so I like to do 100% votes.

I think that a lot of people are relying on auto votes to give their support to their favourites, I do it as well. People might be upvoting a bit less / less power these days, though. I've lost a bit of voters for the SPC, but going to keep it going nonetheless!

I have been reading various posts on voting bots to determine if it is something I would want to try. I found this post to be one of the most grounded and transparent I have come across. Thanks for sharing your experience, both good and bad. I'm still not sure what I'll do, but I like your point about regularly checking the accounts on your list to make sure they are still producing quality content. That might be a good balance of trying this out, but still staying in line with my values and promoting good content.

Your welcome. ;-)

I want to confess my sins and start to be a better person.

  • I came here two weeks ago. That is the first thing I need to confess. Stupid me. Unforgiveable. I should have been here since I've heard about it the first time last year!
  • All I understood was that I need to find whales and powerful Steemians and engage with them. Somehow I even liked the fact that I don't even mind strange opinions. I mean, isn't it a good thing to engage with pweople yu disagree with? But still! Opinion doesn't count, quality does. I made a mistake and I am going to tidy up my list right after commenting.
  • I upvoted content in languages I can't even read.

I made a terrible mistake. I'll pray the blockchain 30 times as a redress.

Haha. Brilliant. :-)

not so brilliant is that I am cleaning my flippin' list for 2 hours now … Still not half way through!

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.15
TRX 0.03
JST 0.037
BTC 10400.82
ETH 337.30
USDT 1.00
SBD 0.95