RE: Do you think Palnet "holds no value" and disagree with minnowsupport bot?
Don't buy and sell votes, it undermines honest voting.
Content creators are competing for the attention of stakeholders in a level playing field. Paying for votes completely defeats the process of rewarding and discovering content based on the voters subjective appraisal which is required for our platform to succeed.
I am even more against schemes that require buyers to dump Steem to purchase votes using an altcoin as it has all the above harmful effects while putting downward price pressure on Steem directly. My downvotes will be very focused on this set of behaviors.
My recommendation is if you believe these alts are pricing in unchallenged vote buying into their value, then that's likely not going to continue for long and your best bet is to sell them before others do, including the creators of these alts themselves.
I am not the only large stakeholder against these initiatives.
First of all, I believe we have not "met". And I find it uncomfortable that someone, stranger to me, directly "orders" me what to and what not to do.
And let me clarify your misunderstanding regarding steem engine tokens.
Many steem engine tribes, especially SCT, has incentived users to BUY lots steem which supported steem prices. @aggroed will confirm that SCT alone has gathered more than a million steem. Or I guess one may check historic inflow of steem from exchanges (say, upbit) that goes to SCT or other token purchases using the blockchain record.
I have not used non-steem engine based bidbots before, so I have limited knowledge in this matter. But as far as I know, these bidbots were mainly supported or run by large stakeholders. Not sure how these large stakeholders think, b/c I am not one of them.
My recommendation is that if you feel uncomfortable or go against these bots, you should talk to the owners/operators of bots first.
They're not being downvoted because of whatever alleged good they're doing.
They're being downvoted because of vote selling. As I explained, it completely undermines the ability for us to function as a fair content rewards and discovery platform, which is our central value proposition.
Of course people can continue to use these services and many will continue to use our free downvotes to make abusive behavior as unprofitable as possible, which is what they're intended for.
You seem to be advocating school-yard-bully economics.
곰돌이가 @glory7님의 소중한 댓글에 시세변동을 감안하여 $0.011을 보팅해서 $0.029을 지켜드리고 가요. 곰돌이가 지금까지 총 6531번 $74.533을 보팅해서 $84.876을 구했습니다. @gomdory 곰도뤼~
This is a very similar method whales on Whaleshares used that brought down the price of WLS significantly.
Freedomexists being a good example.
What would happen is that you would sell your WLS for BTS, then use BTS to buy the "Whaletoken" on the market. You would send the whaletoken to the whale and he would upvote you for a higher amount of WLS then you spent.
This created massive downward pressure on the price of WLS and one of the reasons Whaleshares is pretty much dead.
SCT wont have such an effect but you can see what stuff like this does.
For now SCT and Steemmonsters are operating almost entirely on vote selling through alt coins and a few self/affiliate votes. Maybe there are a few more.
They've been getting away with a lot as most of the attention was focused on conventional bots since the EIP, but I've been targeting them lately as have others
Its easier to hide since the sale isnt written on chain.
Same as with WLS.
Also could you look at the comment i pinged you in an hour ago. Want to see what you think.
Posted using Partiko Android
They're still written on chain, but through custom json
But your point stands that they don't have to be written on chain
I don't think it's trivially easy to create a vote selling service with very far reach yet have the voting accounts themselves be difficult to detect. Although it may be pretty easy to hide payments that track individual posts. So you can likely scrutinized accounts of known vote sellers for a while at least and downvote their votes on low quality content.
Ultimately, we'll have to move to a culture where people need to feel comfortable downvoting and getting downvoted due to reward disagreement. It'll never feel great getting downvoted, but there doesn't need to be drama each time.
That will never happen. You are not going to magically change the way humans react to downvotes/dislikes. When rewards are involved it is even less possible.
It is an action that people will continue to find insulting and aggressive. It will simply never take place that everyone will just be fine with downvotes, not unless Steem stops receiving new users and maintains only a static number of accustomed voters.