You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Self voter Return on Investment (svROI) notoriety flagging bot
I even saw a 93-94% self-upvoter today. Irony - they were making a fuss about how much they gave back to people with an occasional upvote. (They were also gaming @minnowbooster, but that's another story. )
I agree that it's only part of the suite of problems with which we are grappling at the moment. I mean, this won't ping someone like @trafalgar, who is doing quite well out of voting for the multiple accounts he controls.
At least between you and @transparencybot, people hoovering up the reward pool have to work slightly harder for it (or just delegate their SP to a bidbot).
Right, you hit the nail on the head, it's just one part of a solution. It takes many people working on this stuff to have an effect. The point I've been trying to make is that because a solution isn't completely comprehensive doesn't indicate that it's useless.
That's a fair point and it requires the whole community doing their own thing to keep it clean and fair, thus me constantly banging on to my fellow bottom feeders that we can make a difference in our own small way.
I know that trafalger, I grassed him up before. He's the one who just comments on posts then upvotes himself 6 days later.
I note that he moved his voting to 3-4 days to avoid that attention. But his actions have started to grate with some of the people who have previously defended him - and I can't say I blame them. See here for a relatively short summary, or here for a long comment thread of justification, economics, game-theory, claim and counter claim, as well as the same spurious moral reasoning that the wealthy regularly wheel out any time the peasants get too uppity.
Indeed. It's not just decentralisation. It's that reality, being complex, doesn't reward 'one size fits all' style solutions.
Right on.