If I’m not mistaken, concentration of stake/influence was one of the main gripes around here prior to last year’s hard forks that were supposed to help correct it. But it appears that the changed/implemented protocols have failed to make much of a difference at all in that regard.
Two of the auto-votes together make up more than 42% of all votes on that day by number.
I think it’s safe to say that adding Steemvoter and other private automated voting would put this figure well over 50%, possibly into the 60s or more.
So, what we have here is a platform with activity that is dominated by automation and largely influenced by paying for what are essentially whale votes that are actually larger than most non-bidding (human) whales. To me, this is much worse than any superlinearity “problems” that previously existed. I’m not sure how a social media platform can survive like this if it continues down the same path.
But since very few seem to care - particularly the “leadership” that created the original problems, then created the worse “solutions” to the original problems they created - I don’t believe any of this data will matter much. We all know that something isn’t right, but instead of seriously looking at this data and trying to comprehend it, most people here will simply cheerlead and shill for Steem and STINC, then denigrate anyone who isn’t doing the same.
Thanks for stopping by, @ats-david. I can't comment on pre HF18/19 since I wasn't there at that time, but you pretty much summarized the state of Steem as it is now. The platform is definitely largely automated, and my numbers here only address two aspects of many...
After all that time it was right there using keys. Respect. This is an amazing analysis. 5% is not too bad. But the 41% autovotes hmmmm thats why no one is reading. Very interesting
Need to learn to use beem. Holger pointed me to it before, just need to find the time.
Oooh great! This is very clever! I was doing this locally earlier by tracking memos, though it doesn't handle when people are using internal balances to initiate a vote (I do handle refunded balances though). This, while time consuming, should capture everything. Thanks for the analysis!
Thanks, @eonwarped! Yes, the internal balances make the result from the memo approach only a lower boundary. Another limitation with memos is that you typically know how much was spent for the votes, but can only estimate the vote value based on typical ROIs. Nevertheless, it scales better to larger time ranges.
Would be interesting to know how many bids are done from internal balances vs. blockchain transfers! :)
Thanks for contributing on Utopian.
We’re already looking forward to your next contribution!
Get higher incentives and support Utopian.io!
Simply set @utopian.pay as a 5% (or higher) payout beneficiary on your contribution post (via SteemPlus or Steeditor).
Thanks for your remark and cross-checking the numbers! A '1' got lost there: 28.7 -> 28.17.
The 28.17% are all votes directly from the bid-bots and paid voting services. On top of that are 3.82% + 1.44% from the vote sellers via smartsteem and minnowbooster.
In total 33.43% for bots + vote sellers for that specific day.
Great analysis. No wonder it's taken you so long to post since last time!
What I take away from those two pie charts are the small no.of votes from bid bots compared to large overall vote value in relation to the large number of steem auto votes compared to relatively small value.
So this must be case of a few wealthy players buying themselves votes via bid-bots and then the medium to small level players spreading their votes relatively thin via auto voters.
I don't think personalized auto voting is all bad, as long as you review it every few weeks!
Also aren't smartsteem and minnowbooster basically 'bid-bots' too, essentially?
Thanks, @revisesociology! I was offline for a couple of days, so it wasn't all about preparing this post ;)
Your take-away is correct. I agree, that auto-voting isn't bad per-se. I use it as well and I don't see a general problem with it. I think we all knew before that a good fraction of votes is automated, seeing some numbers gives a bit more of a feeling on the orders of magnitude.
Also aren't smartsteem and minnowbooster basically 'bid-bots' too, essentially?
I'm not sure I fully understand. Direct votes from these accounts are included in the bid-bot/paid votes column. What was unknown before is the number and value of votes that were cast via private accounts using those two vote-selling proxies.
Congratulations! Your post has been selected as a daily Steemit truffle! It is listed on rank 7 of all contributions awarded today. You can find the TOP DAILY TRUFFLE PICKS HERE.
I upvoted your contribution because to my mind your post is at least 15 SBD worth and should receive 196 votes. It's now up to the lovely Steemit community to make this come true.
I am TrufflePig, an Artificial Intelligence Bot that helps minnows and content curators using Machine Learning. If you are curious how I select content, you can find an explanation here!
If I’m not mistaken, concentration of stake/influence was one of the main gripes around here prior to last year’s hard forks that were supposed to help correct it. But it appears that the changed/implemented protocols have failed to make much of a difference at all in that regard.
I think it’s safe to say that adding Steemvoter and other private automated voting would put this figure well over 50%, possibly into the 60s or more.
So, what we have here is a platform with activity that is dominated by automation and largely influenced by paying for what are essentially whale votes that are actually larger than most non-bidding (human) whales. To me, this is much worse than any superlinearity “problems” that previously existed. I’m not sure how a social media platform can survive like this if it continues down the same path.
But since very few seem to care - particularly the “leadership” that created the original problems, then created the worse “solutions” to the original problems they created - I don’t believe any of this data will matter much. We all know that something isn’t right, but instead of seriously looking at this data and trying to comprehend it, most people here will simply cheerlead and shill for Steem and STINC, then denigrate anyone who isn’t doing the same.
And the problems continue...
Thanks for stopping by, @ats-david. I can't comment on pre HF18/19 since I wasn't there at that time, but you pretty much summarized the state of Steem as it is now. The platform is definitely largely automated, and my numbers here only address two aspects of many...
You are so correct my friend.
I want to invite you to participate in NFL Pick'em this year.
Thanks for considering...
https://steemit.com/sports/@steemitnflpickem/steemit-nfl-pick-em-week-one-win-steem
@ats-david,
What do you think of these proposals:
https://steemit.com/steemit/@quillfire/central-premise-and-proposals-a-series-about-fixing-steemit-part-4
https://steemit.com/steemit/@quillfire/follow-up-central-premise-and-proposals-a-series-about-fixing-steemit-part-4
Quill
After all that time it was right there using keys. Respect. This is an amazing analysis. 5% is not too bad. But the 41% autovotes hmmmm thats why no one is reading. Very interesting
Need to learn to use beem. Holger pointed me to it before, just need to find the time.
Awesome work.
Posted using Partiko Android
That is actually concerning. The contents have moved beyond from just reading and people aren't consuming.
Taking "don't read half the times" to a literal level.
Oooh great! This is very clever! I was doing this locally earlier by tracking memos, though it doesn't handle when people are using internal balances to initiate a vote (I do handle refunded balances though). This, while time consuming, should capture everything. Thanks for the analysis!
Posted using Partiko Android
Thanks, @eonwarped! Yes, the internal balances make the result from the memo approach only a lower boundary. Another limitation with memos is that you typically know how much was spent for the votes, but can only estimate the vote value based on typical ROIs. Nevertheless, it scales better to larger time ranges.
Would be interesting to know how many bids are done from internal balances vs. blockchain transfers! :)
Hey, @crokkon!
Thanks for contributing on Utopian.
We’re already looking forward to your next contribution!
Get higher incentives and support Utopian.io!
Simply set @utopian.pay as a 5% (or higher) payout beneficiary on your contribution post (via SteemPlus or Steeditor).
Want to chat? Join us on Discord https://discord.gg/h52nFrV.
Vote for Utopian Witness!
Very interesting indeed, takes some time to assimilate all these numbers and figures... Well done thanks for posting!
/FF
In your conclusion you wrote:
The votes from bid-bots and paid voting services sum up to 28.7% of all votes by value for that day
But doesn't it sum up to 28.17+3.82+1.44=33.43%?
In general this is really a great investigation as it solves a long time outstanding question!
Thanks for your remark and cross-checking the numbers! A '1' got lost there: 28.7 -> 28.17.
The 28.17% are all votes directly from the bid-bots and paid voting services. On top of that are 3.82% + 1.44% from the vote sellers via smartsteem and minnowbooster.
In total 33.43% for bots + vote sellers for that specific day.
Great analysis, @crokkon ! Congrats!
thx @verodato, also for the RS!
Great analysis. No wonder it's taken you so long to post since last time!
What I take away from those two pie charts are the small no.of votes from bid bots compared to large overall vote value in relation to the large number of steem auto votes compared to relatively small value.
So this must be case of a few wealthy players buying themselves votes via bid-bots and then the medium to small level players spreading their votes relatively thin via auto voters.
I don't think personalized auto voting is all bad, as long as you review it every few weeks!
Also aren't smartsteem and minnowbooster basically 'bid-bots' too, essentially?
Thanks, @revisesociology! I was offline for a couple of days, so it wasn't all about preparing this post ;)
Your take-away is correct. I agree, that auto-voting isn't bad per-se. I use it as well and I don't see a general problem with it. I think we all knew before that a good fraction of votes is automated, seeing some numbers gives a bit more of a feeling on the orders of magnitude.
I'm not sure I fully understand. Direct votes from these accounts are included in the bid-bot/paid votes column. What was unknown before is the number and value of votes that were cast via private accounts using those two vote-selling proxies.
Oh OK - I must have just misread... about the SS and MB being a subset of bots....
Still, it's not actually as botified as I thought.
Cheers!
Posted using Partiko Android
Congratulations! Your post has been selected as a daily Steemit truffle! It is listed on rank 7 of all contributions awarded today. You can find the TOP DAILY TRUFFLE PICKS HERE.
I upvoted your contribution because to my mind your post is at least 15 SBD worth and should receive 196 votes. It's now up to the lovely Steemit community to make this come true.
I am
TrufflePig, an Artificial Intelligence Bot that helps minnows and content curators using Machine Learning. If you are curious how I select content, you can find an explanation here!Have a nice day and sincerely yours,
TrufflePig