You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: How to vote for me as a witness.
This sounds good. As I guess you are not a witness that is pro paid upvote bots. And you probably like to see all the best for Steemit.
I started to follow you and like to see your next witness related posts.
Personally in thinking about resetting all my witness votes and pick them again. At this moment I basically picked the first 30. I did that quickly after I started with Steemit. But meanwhile I have a lot more knowledge about this subject.
The option to proxy from somebody you trust to know the witnesses they vote for is great for while you are still learning who does what.
Yes I am against bid bots and vote selling. I believe the stakeholders who sell their votes have turned this into another Facebook, but without the network which we failed to achieve. This could have been achieved if the stake holders all realised exactly where the value comes from and how those people need to be rewarded to draw people in, but unfortunately there was never a way to hold those who are selfish accountable for the cost they charge on the people who play by the rules.
There is actually one thing why I did not give my proxy to someone. And that is because there are about 5witnesses that I really would like to vote on. But none of the proxy lists I saw so far, contained all of these witnesses.
I still wonder if there wouldnt be any possibility to come up with a technical solution to prevent the paid upvote bots of being around. For example if we would say that one could only give 1 upvote per 4 minutes, then the upvote bots would have a bit of an issue. But even then they would probably find some kind of solution. And this would have some other negative side effects. anyway I was thinking that those IT coders could come up with some kind of solutions.
In essence I also think that a concept like Steemit should be able to replace Facebook. Having that said I really dont think Steemit will be that concept. There are just to many difficulties for the average Facebook user. And then there are also a lot of threats like the paid bots, spammers, people taking a lot of money from the reward pool, etc.
There is no way to eliminate them and all the suggestions made penalize actual users. Just for example, your time idea, just means the proliferation of sock-puppet accounts to work around time limits with multiple voters. There is no technical way to eliminate them, and not much in the way of cultural ways. Since 1 in 3 users user them according to the data.
The deal here is they touch 17% of the reward pool. That leaves 83% of the money and 70% of the users "doing it right" without bidbots. Plenty of room for everyone, and in the end, much like real world issues, often used an excuse...
Where did you find the 17%?
Earlier I saw a calculation ending at 30%.
Lately I've heard that in the past it wasn't possible to delegate SP. That might work. Or do you also see disadvantages?
Crap now I can't find the book mark I specifically saved because I knew whenever I referenced this, I would be asked to source it. I want to say it was on a massive page of either grumpycat or berniesanders posts last week (probably gcat) and was by either um, markymark, realwolf or abh12345 (a data mining witness) but then I think no, wait, it was on the timcliff dust vote removal post comment threads. Damn, I'll keep digging for the reference, it was pretty reputable, I just can't remember where it was now, I'm going to need it though, more and more probably, so hang on let me see if I can find it.
I remember the data was cited along with this guys reports.
https://steemit.com/steemit/@maxg/bid-bot-usage-report-for-04222018
Which as the summary shows, doesn't even support 1 in 3 people using them for the more commonly cited 50-60K daily active users logging in.
This all seems like one of those issues that takes people's focus off doing good on their own and gives them convenient scapegoats, arguments to spend time on and excuses for not building good businesses. While many people continue to do so, despite it all.
I just read this email. And it indeed states that only a very few Steemonians use the bid bots. However the total value of all bought upvotes can be easily calculated. And I did this and come to a percentage of 34% from the total upvote value being sold by bid bots. So I stick to my opinion and think this is a real threat for Steemit.
Delegation of stake was not originally convenient, but I don't think it was ever fully impossible. In the absolutely earliest days of the chain, it still needed cli wallets and arcane and obscure steps that made all the stuff hard to do, and many things weren't obvious to users. Not sure if it was ever simply not possible.
But no, that wouldn't stop it. You can still make deals to loan sp, via contracts and trust, or just load your own accounts up and run bid bots on them directly. It might mitigate some by complexity, but it wont stop it. Just make it look different.
It's impossible to stop users from using the accounts and money to do any of the things, it is only possible to change how easy or well known doing such things is (like not making bot tracker pages for example) but that all depends on the consumers too.
And right now, about a third of consumers and a large number of stake holders support a bid bot industry. Cool for other users? Debatable. Going away? No. Deal with it? Deal we must.
Adapt, improvise and overcome. Also use the enemies weapons against them. Don't like trending? Bot better shit up there. This is the tool, and this is the battleground. Pick up arms, or be shot down.
Such is life on the chain.
Although I don't like them, you are fully right about everything you said.
Thanks for all your replies and the good conversation!
One of the reasons I dropped out of the witness is the kind of talk below. "There is no way to stop them". This isn't true at all, there was alongtimes when selling votes was economically too risky and though there may have been a black market it would have only existed due to the bad distribution model of steem. The witness below insisted that we should support vote buyers because they have all the Steem power. He will do anything to claw his way to the top and at the expense of steemians. He does not believe the future of steem and I have the screenshots to prove that he wants to milk as much as he can out of steem as a witness before moving onto Eos.
As for delegation, it was originally supposed to be launching with another tool that would be used for accountability. This was called negation and cork knows all about it but neglected to mention it. Negation to delegation is like the downvote to the upvote. Vote negation would have been used to nullify the SP on both sides. So if a whale of 500k SP wanted to mute the votes of a whale with 1 million SP (or other way around) the first whale could use all his power to negate the whale and the second whale would be left with 500k SP to vote with. This also has the effect of increasing everybody elses voting power. The whales can remove the negation when they come to an agreement to stop voting or delegating whatever way was abusive.
Thanks again for your comprehensive answer!
To be honest I don't believe Steemit has a chance to become successful. While in essence it should be possible for a concept like this. But right now I have a feeling it could have a bigger chance with a centralized system then with the current system (which some people call decentralized, but to my opinion it's far from that).
I didn't realize that also people like you are quitting Steemit. In terms of impact that could be much worse then a few new users that quit after 40 posts.
And I wonder what happens if all these greedy people go to EOS in 2 months 🤔😜
Down voted, that's a bit sad 😥
Are these accounts from Bernie downvoting? Or is it Sircork? Or someone else?
Hi crypto-economist. I really appreciated your comment and regret that I won't be giving any further witness updates as I dropped out of this witness team.
Thanks for letting me know.
Is also a reminder that I still need to come up with a plan for my witness votes.
I don't hope you are going to quit Steemit fully?
Just 2 weeks witnessing has taught me a lot and made me lose hope for this network. There are a lot of good witnesses trying to bring the good back to steem, but they're doing it out of their own pockets, and the ones who are taking advantage of people and taking the users for granted are ruthlessly clawing their way to the top, many of whom have long been at the top. There's less than 2 months before eos launches and I'm considering doing a detox until then. I'm very excited to see something new and help build something more community orientated for the good people who are powerless in this greed oriented system.
Steem was very good to me and I appreciate what I learned from it. But competition is thankfully coming.
Will EOS create and/or become a steem competitor?
I'm really doubting to remember something. I think I've heard that the owner of EOS also started another blockchain? Perhaps it's even Steem?
Are you really going to sell all your Steem? You have the full right to do so. And I would even suggest. But it sounds a bit weird for me. I mean when I look at my account balance it's basically nothing. But yours is a different story. So I could imagine a lot of things, but I thought perhaps I can just ask you.
The creator of EOS is Dan Larimer, he invented the Bitshares chain, the steem chain and EOS.
He has stated EOS.io, the EOS company producing the chain code initially will not launch a social network, and simultaneously in what seems somewhat contradictory to that, has also endorsed me directly, with an upvote on comments suggesting he might. A chinese company named ONO will be launching the first expected viable english/chinese social network application on the EOS block chain operating system and platform. Anything else is rumor and subject to change.
good leave you downvoting cunt