Issue about auto-votes with example of user with 73 reputation draining reward pool with auto-votes /// Auto-votes are killing Steemit!
We all noticed same profiles on trending page getting all the money all the time. Reason for that are auto-votes. Most of that posts are not voted manualy by users. Instead they are on some auto-voting list. I'm totally against auto-voting lists because they are killing Steemit on many ways...
First of all...if you saw some post you liked, is it so hard to upvote it manualy?
If you are on someone's voting list or you use auto-votes, you are implying that no one from that lists shouldn't read any of upvoted articles if they don't want to. If they didn't read it, what is the point of that upvote? What is the point of your article if upvoter didn't read it? What is the point of Steemit if in the end only comes to auto-votes?
You also imply that auto-voters shoudn't be active on Steemit. Only non active users will use auto-votes. Why should anyone be used on auto-voting list if they are active member on Steemit? Is it so hard to scroll the feed to see what people you follow posted?
Is this site becoming only money or we want to built better world? If we want to, we woudn't have auto-votes. Instead you will read articles and only upvote content you really liked. Also when your voting power is used on auto-voting list, you won't upvote anyone else most of the time.
Most (99%) give up after few weeks because they get only pennies and same people get big bucks constantly. When they see that they just give up. That is completely understandible. If you see your effort is not appreciated somewhere, you leave that place.
Many people started using auto-voting lists to drain money from reward pool. I noticed one member with 73 reputation doing that all the time. I just can't watch it any more because I fell sorry for new people joining Steemit and trying to write original content.
Here is one example of posting just for auto-votes. Profile is @dana-edwards She posts at least few articles daily. Most of that articles are copy/paste in form of 'Here are news from Institute for'...than bla bla few more sentences and reference link at bottom. I saw many times she posting 3 or 4 articles in peroid of half of hour. You can do that only if you copy/paste article, change few lines and boom you have article for Steemit for auto-votes. On her auto-voting list there are always same names. Didn't research it deeply, but saw that first on list is always non active user @wackou
I don't have anything against @dana-edwards and 'her articles'. I'm against her receiving auto-votes for copy/paste and in same times original authors trying to make it on Steemit getting pennies and leaving the site because of it. That is the biggest reason auto-votes are killing Steemit.
For those who will try to defend auto-votes, I will say only this...What is the point of auto-votes?...Rewarding content creator? For what? Their content?...What content if you didn't read it? ;)
P.S.
I had many problems last few months, so I wasn't able to write articles. I'm just finishing few articles where I'm trying to go deep to core of problems on this planet. Probably first one will finish will be titled "Why we become heartless ego obsessed beings?" I like to write when I get inspired. When that happen, the themes I'm inspirated by are not the same, so I'm writing about a lot of things right now.
I don't want to write articles on Steemit just for writing articles so I can earn money on Steemit. I will write about stuff that can make this planet better place. Hope you will find my articles interesting. And of course, don't want to be on any voting list. Your upvote without reading is empty money.
Personally, I only curate manually. I am thankful for the few people who have me on auto-vote lists because I like to earn the money, but I'd rather have people engage with my content.
Instead of auto voting, I think people who don't want to read and vote on articles should delegate their Steem Power to manual voters. I understand you don't get paid to delegate your vote, but if you're voting to get paid I think you're voting for the wrong reason.
Steemit has the opportunity to be a community that's good for everyone. I think building that community is far more important than income, and I would love to see some minnows and dolphins at the top of that "trending" list.
Agree with everything you said. If Steemit become about who upvoted you and not how to change situation on this planet, what is the point of Steemit? I think that should be on first place and money aspect should only exist because it fair to share reward with content creator and not taking all for yourself like other social networks.
Great article. Personally I belive in manual labour.
:D
I use autovoter but i read the log daily.. i have not posted in 2 weeks. Do u consider me active or no? It saves me some work but it makes me lazier too. Whats the solution???
I don't know what is solution for you. You will have to decide it for yourself.
If you read articles on which you auto-voted that is ok in my opinion. Problem is auto-votes without reading the article. 'Problem' to be precise, because this is my opinion. If someone wants to use auto-votes without reading the article, that is their right. I'm not here for the money in firstz place, so I don't want to be on auto-voting list. If Steemit become about who upvoted you and not about changing the world...what is the point of Steemit?
Suppose I set up a bot to auto-vote specific posters who I follow? Is this bad for Steemit? What about if I auto-vote specific posters who have beyond a certain threshold of followers? Finally what if I auto-vote based on what me and a group of others who control the Steem Power decide are the topics of interest?
In any of these cases the market adapts. Bloggers will adapt to receive votes. The amount of value people get from a vote isn't necessarily reflected by the length of the post, or the person who posted it, or the amount of money the post got, because value is subjective. What matters is whether or not the post created a dialogue which creates a lasting value.
For example the post you made here COULD have created more value if you didn't focus in on just one person (me) and focused on auto-voting instead. But you offer no solution and really only choose one blogger as if bots only vote for that one blogger. No, what happens is some bloggers post more than others, and bots vote for the bloggers who post frequent high quality content, and some days or some weeks that is me, but other days it's others.
If th content quality is the problem address that. The auto-voting can fund high quality content, even if short. On the other hand if you only complain about the bloggers then you don't improve content quality and you don't make being a blogger attractive either.
When I think of the value of a post I don't only think of the original blog post but also the comments it encourages. So your post if it encouraged a good discussion does add lasting value because when people search in a search engine on a certain topic they'll see the discussion on Steemit.
What is point of auto-upvote if upvoter didn't read the article?
How do you know who reads or doesn't read the article? Suppose I'm a whale and I want to fund certain bloggers because I know a lot of people who do read their articles? Is this also wrong? If it's not wrong for bloggers to use Patreon why is this any different?
I'm neutral for the most part on the bots question but I even made a post recently asking "Is Steemit for AI" addressing some of the same thinking you're having. You don't actually read my posts.
You are complaining about a person who "blogs too frequently" and is "milking the reward pool" when there actually are bots which comment on posts leaving no value at all and getting paid from the reward pool? Where are your priorities?
References
How do you know who reads or doesn't read the article?...What is the point of article if upvoter didn't read it?
Do you post for upvotes or because you want to make situation on this planet better? You said so far that market dictates what and how much you will post. My opinion is that most of your post are made just for money. Few sentences and that is it. That is not research. I can make as many article as you, but I'm not doing that because I'm not here for the money. I'm here because Steemit is much more fair than other social networks. Money is just small aspect of Steemit. I see it all become about the money. Between the lines I can see that money is on first place on Steemit. That is your right. My right is to say my opinion. That is that you are pushing away many users because they don't want to write articles for pennies and in the same time see someone like you for few lines getting 30$ on any article. If you don't understand how that can push away people from Steemit, that your problem.
The interesting thing is, it's not the auto-voting which is the solution or the problem. In Steemit as a blogger you have some strategies such as:
But whether you post a lot of short or a lot of long posts they have to be high quality. High quality content is what gets you followers. Followers get you votes because these are like your subscriber base. If I receive auto-votes, it does not change the fact that the goal is to build a large enough subscriber base that it can fund higher quality much longer posts.
As the reward pool shrinks, perhaps instead of complaining about people who are adding value, posting frequently, engaging their followers in discussion, why not figure out how to reverse the trend so the reward pool can be big enough so that the quality of content meets your standard.
Point is, I'm not doing anything you or anyone else can't do. I read a lot, I post sometimes long posts, sometimes short posts, I post frequently (as much as I can). Finally, I posted on Steem since May 2016 and reached 3000+ followers, so each post I make gets usually 50-100 votes if it's quality, but this doesn't mean I get $50-100, as the amount of money I get per post is separate from the amount of time I put into posting or the amount of votes I get. Long term I expect this to change, and for follower base to have a bigger influence.