RE: What if paid voting services provided truly passive ROI for their clients? Would this be an improvement for the ecosystem?
To me, the ideal thing would be for the top-tier stakeholders to take action and protect the ecosystem against the voting service abuse that is diluting everyone's stake and destroying the value of STEEM, but it seems that this is not going to happen.
My unlikely but not completely crazy hope is that Justin Sun will give some LLM-based agents a substantial stake of Steem and they could be convinced that the vote-bots are bad for the economy and be willing to take action.
The voting service automatically replies to their own daily post with a separate comment for each client where the comment beneficiary is set to that client's account.
They probably don't need individualized comments, they could just set the beneficiaries appropriately on a single mega-voted post.
Thoughts?
There are pros and cons to trying to make the abuse less visible. In the long run I think transparency is one of the core values of blockchain tech, so rather than paper over the problem we're probably better off leaning in to that and letting the ugliness be visible until someone tries to fix it.
That would be entertaining. It sounds like Tron's first pass at LLMs was less than optimal, though.
Yeah, I was thinking that too. Not sure how many beneficiaries you can put on a single post, but they could definitely reduce the number of posts.
0.00 SBD,
0.03 STEEM,
0.03 SP