You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: 100 DAYS OF STEEM : Day 33 - Tackling Abuse on Steem - Part I - What is Abuse?
Indeed, just another evidence of how well these kinds of algorithms are working. ;-)
Indeed, just another evidence of how well these kinds of algorithms are working. ;-)
Yes with 100% selfvoting you have 0.0 (like your friend hae...) so I am worse cause I have 0.0% selfvoting and - 1,1.
OK so your opinion is that selfvoting is better than votings others.
My guess is that the algorithm doesn't differenciate between 'self-voting' and upvoting 'other' accounts. It matters how often and strong certain accounts are getting upvoted (and also how many different accounts are receiving upvotes).
The algorithm cannot know anyway if the upvoted accounts belong to the same user or not.
I didn't write the algorithm of Voting CSI, so I can only guess how it works. It could well be that it also checks how often these upvoted accounts upvote each other (if they are building a closed group which is mutually upvoting each other) and how diverse the upvotes are which they receive from other users (in this aspect @haejin beats you).
All in all it does a great job to detect selfish voting behaviour. YOU and @haejin fully deserve the low rating. :)
Haha ... I have 0.0% selfvoting :-)
As I see you get for every comment votes from the same two accounts - so probably this is good and normal.
Just read what I (already) wrote: the algorithm cannot really know if your self-voting rate is 0.0, because it doesn't know how many accounts you own. That's why the 'official' self-vote rate doesn't matter much for Voting CSI.
Yes, these two accounts upvoting me have a very sensitive algorithm which detects whenever @jaki01 has to spend too much precious time being involved in time consuming discussions, and then grant him some smart money as compensation.
However, Voting CSI also detects on how many different accounts (which are also not upvoting each other) @jaki01 spreads his valuable upvotes and thus grants him the well deserved high rating.
"Just read what I (already) wrote: the algorithm cannot really know if your self-voting rate is 0.0, because it doesn't know how many accounts you own. That's why the 'official' self-vote rate doesn't matter much for Voting CSI."
Account with 100% selfvoting has 0.0 CSI.
When other accounts have negative CSI it means that it's better to vote yourself instead of voting other.
OK I got it !