You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: SELF UPVOTING OF COMMENTS IS NO LONGER ALLOWED, what would be the consequences, what would be the benefits.
Ummmm. You seem to have missed the main problem. If you push self-votes away then people will just build smurf accounts and vote themselves that way. Others will argue that it's against freedom and liberty to do as they will with their own steem power.
Thank you for pointing that out Master :)
Any chance of a resteem from you so your mates get into this discussion? ;)
Hmmm. Then you'll see a whale with lots of pet minnows... is there a way around this
Yes, big accounts either delegate power to others to deal with such behavior through flagging, or they do it themselves, but short of that there is no solution. I think it's a very simple solution and it doesn't require any HF, just community initiative.
Correct, but where are the good whales to step up and put an end to this activity that will kill the whole steemit platform in the end.
Debatable. Right now there are only a few people that can be considered abusive, and there's plenty of discussion about among the veterans about this I think.
I know this has been repeated a lot, but we're in beta, and although the system has changed considerably in specific ways, overall, the platform has remained the same: police yourselves. come to consensus.
There may be only a few you consider abusive but as a very new person to steem I noticed right away the comment and upvote situation. Not just from whales, but others are doing it, learning from the big boys ya know. I have been here for less than 3 weeks and this has been a discussion in my household because my boyfriend and I (who joined the same day as me) thought this might be something we were supposed to be doing since it seemed to work. Since people were doing this to our account were we supposed to be doing that on others? I looked into it and found all this.
I am glad to know that the veterans are aware of this and discussing this
If everyone adapted their MO, this place would go to hell in a hand basket.
That's why I think a good solution would be to report all such activities of reward pool rape to a community or group who will have a post up every week that gets edited regularly to reflect who should be flagged and have their collusive behavior negated and send the rewards back to the community, and that's not against freedom or liberty, people have the right to do as they will with their own steem power, like flagging behavior that is counter to community.
What is the key to getting ideas like this implemented though
Time/effort and perseverance.
You are right, there is nothing else, and there is a hope that others with more power behind them will step in and assist.
I think all the "self voting lists" and the entire issues is completely over-shadowing all kinds of other work we should be doing on the Steemit platform.
To quote @smooth:
"Someone who buys SP and then selfvotes is not 'draining' anything and at best can get back a portion of what was put in. It causes no harm at all."
Investors are the ones who underwrite all of the rewards on this platform. If you are not an investor, or are only a smaller investor, you need to focus your efforts on creating inspiring content that makes investors want to give their money to you. Whatever else they do or don't do with their money (including self-voting) is not your concern and does not harm you in any way. Nevertheless, you do have a downvote that you can use to disagree with what you think are underserved rewards. I suggest using it."
"The idea of creating 'lists of shame' and demonizing people is divisive, creates a hostile and toxic environment attractive to no one, and serves no useful purpose. There is no way to tell from these lists whether the content is deserving of the rewards or not. The only way to tell is by actually looking at the content, and if you think it is undeserving, downvote it."
"Your own statistics show that self-voting is awarding about 8.5% of the reward pool. I don't find that suggestive of any problem whatsoever. It is probably a very reasonable number given that the current parameters give people 10 full power votes to make per day. Thus one is being applied to the voters' own content and nine to others' (on average, of course). Seems fine."