You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Vilifying Bots
@mrosenquist Essentially we're in agreement. The first way you put it sounded like civil forfeiture. A penalty box would not be bad, but you need to link bot to human first because a penalized bot doesn't care. His owner will though.
Once we know the owners then let them have as many as they want to have as long as they feed and train them. If the bot goes bezerk it's their job to fix it or their account remains frozen until it does. I am totally against forfeiture, but a points based system that locks funds whilst already consolidating them at the owner level and yet allowing the bot to have it's own identity separate from her owner feels like the right solution here.
So yes, this is a good idea.
To be clear, I do think forfeiture is a viable option, one of many to consider. If the TP level is reached, then the community has effectively deemed the bot's action to be damaging. Any acts of the bot which produced gain (Steem, SP, and SD/SBD) would be forfeit to the community, rewarding those who identified the caustic bot. Seizure occurs in the real world all the time. If a thief steals money from your pocket and is caught, they don't get to keep the ill-gotten-goods.
This is one of many penalty options the Dev's can choose. Personally, I think it would be a powerful one. Financial disincentives can be highly effective against financially motivated anti-social behaviors.