Reminder, GrumpyCompliance in 7 days + Look who's buying votes on his 6 days old posts.
@contentjunkie who authored this beautiful rant and this new one : link happen to be among the most prolific vote buying profiteer.
Payments:
for these 6 days old posts:
https://steemit.com/gaming/@contentjunkie/diablo-3-s-darkening-of-tristram-anniversary-event-is-coming-back-for-2018-throughout-january-players-will-be-able-to-return-to
and
https://steemit.com/bitcoin/@contentjunkie/trump-s-new-tax-bill-means-changes-ahead-for-u-s-bitcoiners
Here some sample of post promoted in the last days :
This flower picture buying 124$ vote at 5th day https://steemit.com/colorchallenge/@ekaterinka/73poqn-colorchallenge-sundaypurple
$410 on 5th day on a simple picture that say "Happy new year" (apparently it's a meme)
https://steemit.com/dmania/@michaelmorcos/happy-new-year-zg1hbmlh-tu5hu
Curious for more? Check by yourself the value of the comment promoted after 3.5 days vs the first 24h.
Rational :
About 99% of people buying votes on their post older than 3.5 days are doing it for pure profit by taking from the reward pool while enriching mainly early ninja miner and vote selling bot operators. Not allowing votes past 3.5 days will give us more time to detect and counter high votes purchased on very low quality content.
Reminder:
To everyone using paid promotion services; make sure the service you're using is GumpyCompliant by checking in the "Max Post Age" row is it's less than 3.5 days on @yabapmatt bottracker (link)
Unless votes sellers become GrumpyCompliant in the next 7 day @grumpycat will push the vote buying abuse ratio even closer to 100% by flagging the most legitimate use of post promotion at the worst possible time...
Negative curation isn't happening not because of a lack of time but because of a lack of balanced incentives between up and down votes.
The rules of Steem for downvotes have to improve to at least account for the lost opportunity cost of curation reward.
I like the idea but this will mostly piss-off the wrong people.
Explanation for high upvote
There is an additional reason why negative curation is not common: the misconceptualization of downvotes on Steemit as "flags." This was a originally bandaid to solve a minor problem but has created a much larger problem in the use and culture of Steem. The metaphorical dressing on a scratch has festered into a deep, infected wound.
Another conceptual deficiency that the UI could be changed to improve is that rewards before a post or comment is 7 days old are subject to change. This is essentially part of the user-network contract that someone enters when they make a post or comment on Steem, whether they know it or not. There is potential for the UI to better educate and inform users about this, implicitly and explicitly.
Smart idea, downvote should cost less.
I am not milliner to "spend" 100$ on down voting someone.
I absolutely support investors making money, but this idea that every action you take should make you instant rewards just is taking that idea too far.
The long-term value of your investment vs. being able to take the most money out is what each "investor" will have to face at some point.
Smart idea, i completely agree with you,wrong work will down your rating
I completely agree
Yes I am agree. It will piss-off the wrong people.
I think the formula should be adjusted to make it profitable to flag spam content. An idea could to be to have a separate flag and down-vote button? At minimum, it should be a break even for flagging so accounts don't lose their voting power when they flag.
It will only be profitable to flag bad content when the community gets behind it. Not only whales should be rewarded for policing the block chain but users at all echelons of power. Consider checking out the Steem flag rewards project.
https://steemit.com/abuse/@steemflagrewards/steem-flag-rewards-pilot-fighting-blockchain-abuse
The bitter truth.
Yes i agree with you....nice idea
Agreed. @steemflagrewards is an initiative to assuage that fact by giving back to good down voters; however, the inability to receive 100% SBD post rewards currently serves to limit that.
@Grumpycat Steemit's liar, hypocrite & terrorist in chief.
Why don't you tell us about your profiteering? You claim to want more time to flag poor content yet you upvote the most flagrant of low quality content to enrich yourself.
Go on @Grumpycat tell us how you are just profiteering for the sake of our stakes.
As you can see, speaking on burning topics makes ~6000 USD in 10 hours :)
Good question - but no answer from @grumpycat ;)
@davidconstantine thats a part of the answer :D)
i agree
@grumpycat I don't want any trouble. I just want to be left alone to do my own thing.
So are you saying all vote bots are not compliant cause 3.5 days?
Once the rules you want to enforce go into effect if I make a sufficiently original post and use a prohbitied bot but do so within first 3.5 days for noncompliance detection do I risk a downvote from you or is that ok?
Are you forcing a total embargo of all bots that go beyond 3.5 days sorry if it is more clear above. I just really dont want any trouble from anyone. If anyone has a problem please let me know and I will try to comply subject to my values and conscience.
@fatkat I've just made the change for @smartsteem and @smartmarket that we only allow posts that are 3.5 days old or less. So you don't have to worry there :)
Will make the announcement post later
And thats why my friend loves @smartsteem & @smartmarket !!!
Selling votes, but allowing others to disagree. Balanced..... Allowing someone to buy a vote but still allowing others to disagree....
Thank you for fair practices.
@grumpycat I was downvoted into oblivion on some 5 day old posts after being mistaken for a combatant in the recent war.
My reputation went down to 11. If I could not have bought votes to restore my original positive vote counts on my posts, my account would be all but trashed.
I fear your idea will give whales even more power to destroy dolphins and minnows.
I saw you got flagged to hell and wondered wtf was going on!
If that happens again, let me know and I'll fix your rep. You have been nothing but friendly and helpful everywhere I have interacted with you.
Thanks @dutch! I'm hoping with the war ended that it won't be an issue again, but I appreciate it a lot. The #gridcoin community has some amazing people.
So should I promote my posts after 6 days for maximum profit??
No, they buy votes after 6 days for two reasons:
The actual return on the upvote purchase is the same. Point is, raping the rewards pool secretly is not helping this platform.
raping the rewards pool period is not helping this platform!
Unfortunately, as long as vote bots have a positive ROI, then rewards pool rape is a given.
It's a hard problem to solve but if we as a community can do it then steem will be worth a lot more, it's already good as I find a lot of good content but spam pollution does annoy me.
I will change my bot @boostme settings soon.
It's time to take care about reward pool rape and stop it.
(Upvoted for visibility)
I don't think it matters, as long as people can buy upvoted, steem won't be awesome platform where everyone can feel equal.
My friend just joined steem, and left after few weeks, because she writes for hours - and there is no visibility, while some shitty posts from pumpers, go up.
just don't look for posts with $1000 payouts.... be yourself and make your own statistics. If everybody will just want to be the best or best paid, than most will fail. Nothing comes overnight. Fact!
The same thing my friend said...
Good on you for responding. I'm not sure how I feel about the way these changes are being argued, but I think keeping an eye on the way bidbots affect the platform is important, and noble of you to risk losing some bids to look out for the long term.
I don't see a difference between buying on 6 day or 1 day.
it is all what rotten in steemit eco system, people shouldn't have the power to buy votes, because in current system that means other quality content that have less influential friends or millions in the pocket - won't be heared.
Thank you, I do support the 3.5 day policy and am generally against abusive upvote purchase. I am just wondering : what is the rationale to limit the payout period to only 7 days? After all, the post will then still stay on the steem blockchain forever. If an author writes a quality travel post and someone discovers it three years later via Google, it is still valuable. However, at that point, the author does not get any reward anymore. Doesn't this policy even encourage to post only content with a very short value lifespan? Why would I spend hours writing quality posts for steem of I only get a share of the value it creates in the first 7 days?
Maybe in the future some kind of SMT could be made as a way to give credit to those authors that make content with long lasting appeal. For now the reader can send a tip to the authors that never get recognition. You know? the ones that dont write about the flagging war.
This is a great answer. I was also thinking that the way ReSteeming works could be tinkered with. If I find a post from a year ago that is really good (and I do from time to time), what use is there to resteem it? I'm better off linking to the stale article in one of my posts instead. I can always manually send someone steem of steem dollars as thanks for an old post, but that system never works. There needs to be a way to automatically tip someone from your own steem when upvoting an old post. You're right though, SMT's will provide ways to do this automatically.
I imagine though that no matter what changes are made, there is always going to be someone waiting to exploit them. I'm excited and scared for SMTs for this reason, especially in conjunction with the new update allowing for instant account creation. But there's also good too, because no grumpycat can ever downvote a post to take away a SMT reward (yet), or earn thousands of dollars a day by creating artificial drama between two accounts owned by (quite likely) the same person, or two people who know each other in real life. I feel like these "knight in shining armor, come to take out the abusers" posts take a page from PT Barnum's handbook, attracting thousands of upvotes for a manufactured battle.
Apt! I need answers to this.
Agree with you on this point Sir. There is so much good information out there which will remain relevant for a long time like various guides or just interesting articles. It is a shame that thanking the author by pressing up vote button is pointless after 7 days period.
Because its a possibility that within the given 7 days period, some might still be able to find it and vote for it. It's for extended exposure of the content.
@juvyjabian i would focus on the benefits and problems on having rewards for good quality posts even after 7 days maybe with no time limit. One reason fo it ? Because at the end of the day my article on how to do x will be found on google even after years and be useful. I would suggest we discuss it on a new page if you guys want to
Thank you @digitalplayer you are of course absolutely right. Sorry to pull the discussion in another direction here. I opened a separate threat where we can discuss this issue: https://steemit.com/steem/@raci/does-the-7-day-payout-period-on-steem-still-make-sense
@digitalplayer this is a very good point. The value of good content doesn't decline with the age of a post. I never understood why the steemit founders set a time limit on rewards for posts. As for the voting bots, I thinkthey were inevitable. If you have whales and even witnesses with high SP upvoting their own posts and those of other whales and taking the majority of the reward pool, it's natural that regular people would develop bots with votes for sale to try and get a little of the rewards pool. The question is: with all of the whale voting, self-votes and paid votes, how will we know if content is any good based on vote count alone? We won't.
@ammonite You won twice in one comment with that one! Shucks I might just follow you for that comment!
Thank you @maneki-neko
You do know you are thanking someone that is actively taking thousands of dollars out of the reward pool for comments that say nothing more than "SBD correction" right?
Thank you for the post! I did not even know about these rules. I'll know now. And repost for all my subscribers!
Manipulation of the Steemit blockchain in ways other than it was intended to be utilized is an ongoing issue, and isn't exclusive.
Improvements to the infrastructure that fix exisiting issues are always welcome by users of the platform at many levels.
Here's a quote from the author @grumpycat:
A 3.5 day cutoff could be implemented quickly and easily and would solve many issues. Many social media users don't view content much older than this in most cases, therefore little is lost.
Striving to overcome the issues that plague Steemit is key; small tweeks to the beta stage that the platform is currently in are welcome, so long as they do not destroy what the community is trying to build and accomplish as a whole.
Thank you for your continued contributions to Steemit @grumpycat, and may 2018 bring great things.
-The Beached Whale-
Editor in Chief - The Anderson Report
For most small users, content rarely get read after the first day. Hell, a lot of posts never get read again once they leave the new section.
Taking thousands of dollars for the words "SBD correction" over and over and over is a valued contribution to you?