You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The Next Generation BidBots: A Proposal
Great article. I think the bot owners are disinclined to cap the total because they are cleaning up on the ignorance of newer users. It is kind of disgusting to me. I experimented with the bots a bit. My experience was that late voters often sent me into negative territory or break even.
Capping at a guaranteed return rate of a minimum 5 percent would at least ensure that bot users would get some benefit from the process.
I doubt it will happen. Self regulation is important, but why do it if my bot is turning me a profit every round?
Thanks, yes I mentioned the obvious self-interest of bidbot owners and their delegators. From a personal usage point of view, just be careful whether the "curation toggle" on the bot-tracker is ON or OFF - the default is ON, which deducts the 25% curation rewards. If you have judiciously upvoted your post before the bidbot, you can make back some of that curation rewards.
I cannot peer into people's brains but some of the bidding I've seen could be naive (to be charitable) but others seem quite malicious in knowingly ruining the ROI, including, of course, their own, hence the deduction that such "rational actors" have other intentions. We shall see!
I found the info on bot tracker to be inconsistent at times
There is a genuine problem with which prices to use, and in a fast-moving market there can be a significant difference between STEEM's live market price and the blockchain median price.