RE: Why I Stopped Using Upvote Bots And Why You Should Do The Same!
thanks for that detailed answer! I don't mind upvote bots by principle, because you can create visibility with it. And to me it is also no problem when users earn passive money with bots, because that's like investing in stocks or bonds and then getting returns for it. Theoretically at least, the initial Steem Power has been earned and deserved for writing popular content.
The "abuse" of the system is imo part of what makes it interesting. Where I see the problem is that the power that comes with such obscene amounts of money is abused or neglected. The whales have enormous power and that is ok. They were here before us and at one point they made the right decisions. But abusing the power means that they using the system to enrich themselves on the expense of the big rest of the userbase, which is happening I think with the big upvote bots. The other end is the neglect of power by simply being ignorant about the sytem as not just a blockchain based digital money machine, but also as economic, social and financial universe including all implied complexities. Nobody has to understand everything, but there should at least be the awareness that there is more than just a simple mechanism at work and this needs to be explored and maintained professionally. This btw is something not just the whales and witnesses should be aware of, but also normal users.
I don't mind upvote bots either, if the only motivation to use them was promotion.
I do have a problem and it's different than investing in stocks or bonds. Think about a drug dealer offering 100% guaranteed income in a week for your investment. Would you invest your money with them?
Bots might not be illegal. They might not be as immoral as dealing drugs, but they are still immoral.
They are not only immoral, they are at the same time a bad, dangerous investment. If you invest in a business, you might want to make sure that it's a sustainable business that produces value in the real world.
The use of bots don't create the value they earn, which makes them an unsustainable business, which in turn means, it's a matter of time, before you lose your capital.
People can buy Steem Power. I bought my Steem Power.
It's not only the whales who are making a killing on this platform. No one cares about the abuse happening via small accounts. The return on investment is the same for each size.
What is the difference between one person stealing one million USD and one million people stealing one USD? The net effect is the same.
I completely agree with this paragraph.
I find difficult to argue on the level of morality. It can always be that you misunderstand the intentions and then apply moral standards that have never been intended. If you look at the Steem whitepaper, you will find the talk about the "psychology of a casino" that Steemits content quality is supposed to work by (users overestimate their chances and do more than they should rationally do).
That's why I find it more productive to stay on an utilitaristic level where the biggest question is whether the entire deal of Steem and Steemit can work in the long-run or if it needs some adaption to keep running.
You went into risk and the return comes now in the form of (potential) curation rewards. Never forget: You only get these returns as long as Steem is seen as valuable. If the trust for the underlying blockchain fades, your investment will go sour.
Therefore, I see the argument of having risk-free returns as only valid in a limited fashion. In the shortterm,I agree with you of course, but in the long-run, it's a bit like with interest on bonds. It's the last thing that doesn't get paid, but it can still happen. Even on the level of percentage of returns Steemit is realistic. For the bonds of a very save country you get around 2% interest (in normal times). Finland or Canada may be examples. The 2% are equal to an average default every 30-60 years. But then there are countries like Greece or Argentina, which have to pay 15+% which is equal to a default every 6 to 20 years. Steemit is like those countries (aka worse because highly speculative) and from that perspective the returns for your Steem Power investment actually make a lot of sense.
In terms of opportunity risk and returns the situation is surprisingly balanced and fits into the bigger financial picture, as I think.
That is true. The utilitaristic question would be if this system would work despite that one person stealing 1 Million and whether it would work despite one Million people stealing each 1 Dollar. And on this question, I have the strong feeling that the system will break-down at one point if one person takes away everything and leaving the rest in the rain, while I am not so sure if the other scenario would end in a default as well, because everyone gets hurt and benefits the same way, there is (almost) no reason to run away. The collective behavior just leaves a strange feeling behind.
Steemit in its current form isn't sustainable. Clueless and/or honest investors are paying the abusers. Or in utilitarian terms, some investors are paying other investors for purposes other than intended, i.e. good content, curation. Such schemes don't last long.
My initial intention was to profit from the long term appreciation of Steem Power. I didn't mean to become an active user at the beginning. I just wanted to try the system out before investing the whole stake that I planned at the beginning. After seeing the abuse, I don't plan to invest the whole stake before the system is changed.
I get where are you are coming from, but by talking about high ROI, I don't mean high ROI in fiat terms. I mean high ROI in Steem terms. It doesn't make any sense whatsoever to make 25% ROI in a year passively in an environment with 9.5% yearly inflation. That means somebody is getting ripped off.
Here's how I see the situation. There are two types of Steem/SteemPower investors, the abusers and the abused. It doesn't matter how many people are in each group.
Nope, this is not accurate. If some people withdraw millions from the system and they didn't put those millions into the system in the first place and they didn't publish the content and curate the content to justify those millions, then that means they are ripping it off from someone else.
As soon as my (currently broken) computer situation has normalized again, I am intending to do something about it by creating an account to specifically increase the witness quality. I will call it something like @witnessqualitycontrol (although, a bit long). With this account I will collect delegations of votes for witness by users who aren't interested in voting or are clueless about who to vote. For that, I will develop a system of criteria by which I will judge the quality of witnesses (+the wannabes) and the top 30 of them with the highest quality will get a vote. If you're interested, you can join in.
I guess, it's going to be a lot of work, but I think overall it will make an impact and become a system critical element to the Steem blockchain and maybe beyond. And perhaps, there is even a career possible in that field.
This sounds like a good idea!