RE: Voting-bots are not (inherently) bad
I think it's a childish behaviour to flag a post, as long as it's not spam/plagiarism.
So this is where I will redirect you to the steem white paper section of Subjective Contributions subsection of Voting on Distribution of Currency and then the subsection of that labeled Voting Abuse.
In here you will find the following:
Through the addition of negative-voting it is possible for many smaller stakeholders to nullify the voting power of collusive groups or defecting large stakeholders.
Bid bots would be counted in the defecting large stakeholders and as such is getting groups that are actively putting pressure on them. Eventually that straw is going break and the flag war going on against Haejin will be tiny and minuscule against the War Against the Machines.
Yes that is a terminator reference
Anyways references aside, I can name (off the top of my head) multiple groups and or large stakeholders which are actively pressuring bot owners, flagging bot curated content, and more. I mean the alternative is that manual curation groups cease from existing.
I liked that reference :D
Anyway. Currently I don't see a way of getting rid of the bots, because they have way too much power by now. It seems to be an idealistic approach to flag all bot-curated content to prevent this - because there is just too much of it.
I'm still interested about an answer, how small accounts get enough attention without bots or the mercy of whales. This is something, which seems to be the most important use case for bots.
That is actually something really interesting that I want to point out. here is a post by Justtryme90, one of the steemstem creators, made 2 years ago that answers your question. That being said, I am not certain if bots were as rampant back then as they are now.
People with good content stops buying bids and flags the bad content then the people making the bad content will stop buying votes as it won't be profitable anymore. When nobody buys votes, bots will nolonger be paying the people whom delegate to them. When this happens then people stop delegating and bots lose their power.
I mean sure they will still have power but since all the large bidbots have most of their power through delegations (which aren't cheap) so instead people will choose other paths. Curation trails might be big again or maybe they will have passed for the next tech.
He wrote:
I think, that's naive. Two years ago, it was easier as well. As I wrote in my article: we're living in an attention-economy and to attract attention you need exposure. Especially now, with so many new poeple around, you will need help to be visible - no matter how good your content is.
This is idealism. Most likey, it is not going to happen - the advantages a bot can give, are way too big: more visibility, more follower, more engagement.
I see your point, sure it would be cool, if those weren't needed, but the current situation encourages this behaviour. Even with a few hundred people and some big accounts - you will not be able to change it. The sheer numbers are against you.
Btw: Thanks for a constructive discussion :)