RE: Breaking a Natural Market On Steem
Agreed with the bidbots. Whatever you think of them, they are meeting a demand... I hadn't thought about the influx of new users diluting their power though... But it does make sense... As the return on the vote gets lower.
The thing that I'm struggling with still is why anyone would buy Steem. I know it increases your power over the rewards pool and curation rewards. But if you don't self vote and you have little interest in maximising your curation rewards (I just vote when I see an article that I like (like this post at around 3 minutes) , or I follow trails that I think are doing a good job of supporting things that I like) then there is no clear benefit to buying over natural accumulation? Unless you think it will moon.. But that is speculation and not real use.
We should self upvote and also influence is part of it.
Our own users have made up a bunch of arbitrary rules about not self upvoting, don't use the bidbots, etc. They cannot be enforced and they damage the economy.
THANK YOU! Finally someone who said what I've been thinking all along! I got scorned by other users for upvoting some of my stuff early on. And while it was admittedly a waste of voting power as I didn't enough Steem for it to matter, it does matter now. Granted, I namely did it so any comments on my own posts would show up higher, but that didn't matter to the "No Self-Vote Crowd!"
Also, used bidbots early on. Honestly, a waste of money as it cost more than I earned. But users should be free to use them if they wish, without the collective coming to scorn them about it...
I have no argument about self upvoting! I just don't as at my size it makes little sense to do so... I have more benefit from not self upvoting when I don't land in the top 10 in @abh12345 engagement league. We all do what makes best sense for us. If my self vote was worth more, then the balance would naturally shift.
However, at the moment... That is the only viable use that I see for buying Steem...
No, also reread this post and go look at the trending page.
People are creating a natural marketing economy. People are spending their steem on games and rewarding each other. Some people are beginning to buy and sell things.
It is a slow growing naturally developing social economic system, being distroyed by jealous bloggers and snobs... over a false premice of Quality Content Discovery.
And the unwillingness to fight abuse.
Actually, I haven't looked at the trending page since early last, so it looks much better today than I remember!
Anyway, yes... I think that if Steem flourishes as an economy (games, vote sellers, real life markets and other non blogging stuff) then there is a real viable use case which would have a reason for buying Steem. I guess we aren't there yet... But it is going in the right direction... Now that I think of it, I have won silver raffles with Steem! I guess this is where you were going with your post, that bidbots are also part of the natural economy and that new users would create the demand for Steem usage for things other than blogging purposes.
Anyway, when you talk abuse... Do you mean large account abuse? Or plagiarism and that sort of thing?
Both, Investors should use some portion of their stake to take action against something that would hurt the value of their investment.
I know it is arbitrary again, but personally, I try to use about 10 percent of my stake to fight "bad behavior". :)
Ah... I try to do the clean ups via reporting.. For an account my size, I too terrified of potential retribution... Most of the plagiarists are small... But you never know what is lurking behind.
Anyway, I was thinking about this recently... Most of the large curation accounts (both auto and human managed) are often too happy to give out upvotes... But when reporting is done, they just blacklist or remove the vote (if they do anything at all!). This creates a no loss incentive for scammers... I really wish that those big accounts would do something similar and save a flag of two for punishing verifiable bad behaviour that is exploiting their curation...
I wish everyone would take the risk to do a little clean up, just avoid the big scary accounts! :)
Would you pick a self-vote limit (%) or go full retard? :)
To be honest, I'm probably too lazy to do it... I think the only thing I would change would be the active removal of trail inflicted self votes! That is such a pain to keep finding and reversing! I can't remember, but I don't think my self voting behaviour changed too much after joining the engagement league (I think... Maybe I'm rose tinted...)... That said, I'm not all saintly either, I have a tiny alt account (less than 100 SP) that auto votes on me... But you probably already knew that!
There was definitely a time that I played with self voting (don't we all?) but the return was just tiny it just isn't worth it! ... But I think it wouldn't be worth self voting unless my 100% vote exceeded $10...but I don't see that happening anytime soon!
No i didn't but thank you for your confession son :)
Almost all of us have self-voted at various points - the code allows it, and if it didn't the alts would.
In the past there was a reasonable balance between 'good and bad' whales, so accounts going full retard were suitably reprimanded. The good have since given up / gone passive / turned to the darker side and it's now a competition to see who can earn the most by doing the least.
Personally, I think if you had 2 mill SP you would take a vote on your post each day and distribute the rest :)
Damn it! I outed myself! It is my @msearles account that I use for actifit and game streaming... So that it doesn't annoy people on my main account! Here I thought you were the all seeing eye!,
Anyway, thanks for the faith in my hypothetical self... I wouldn't be so sure, money and power do weird things to all of us!
Yeah as Bengy says, I have an arbitrary rule about self-votes for the league. It's geared towards folks that are engaging and score well enough to collect 1 STEEM - the equivalent of 50 100% votes to self each week.
That is different, it is perfectly fine to set up groups of volunteers who gain something by participating in a certain type of behavior.
It is a choice whether or not to participate. So, I have no problem with this as long as the behaviors are not demonized.
Cool yeah, not demonized at all, I think there is even a 'sorry' where it's mentioned in the post :)
If Steem is successful it could skyrocket in value. I don't think it will happen soon but do think it could work in the long run.
Yes, the potential is there... Hoeve, many things in this space have potential!