You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: I Wonder If Bid Bots Can Be Made Less Harmful?
Interesting topic. 😀 I just posted Let's talk about voting bots. Unfortunately, I'm on the go at the moment, so I'll try to come back and comment later this weekend.
Update: Quick thought. If it's automated, they could even do it with 1000 posts per day, just to stay off the trending page.
Yes, this is a really interesting topic. It's funny that we published posts on the same topic almost at the same time 😃.
The number does not matter if the bots will publish their posts in some separate unpopular tag. The main goal is to keep people from posting their own low-quality posts for guaranteed votes. These short and sometimes pointless posts are cluttering up communities, dominating the trending pages of popular tags, and making Steemit less readable in general.
Yeah, and also interesting that we both focused on the fact that author rewards can be redistributed in order to provide passive income to investors. I've had it in mind for months to do a post on this topic, so it's sort of amazing that these came in so close together.
Right, if the bidbots follow a self-vote and distribute strategy in a more-or-less invisible manner, then we just have part of the community competing for (rewards + audience) and the other part just competing for rewards.
Then if the bidbot posts don't show up as spam and interfere with other curation, their section of the blockchain basically just becomes a "proof of stake" mining pool. Not what the rewards system was intended for, but it's equivalent to some other blockchains. So then we can start to see if the premise in my post was right ("Premise: Rewards + Audience is more valuable than rewards alone.").
TEAM 1
Congratulations! This comment has been upvoted through steemcurator04. We support quality posts , good comments anywhere and any tags.Thank you, @o1eh.