You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Introducing the Steem Defender Bot. Designed to Protect Steem From Economic Collapse and Support Minnow Growth (Article)

in #steemit7 years ago (edited)

It's hilarious that you're talking about "upvote bots" yet using them as often as possible to upvote your own posts.

I suggest you reconsider this hypocrisy. FYI - on Friday I'll have enough SP back to counter all of your purchased hypocritical votes.

It's also hella rude for you to flag those bots comments just to try to hide them from your post considering they're the ones providing all of your rewards.

Sort:  
Loading...

Out of all the accounts, I hope that you take this one out first. People may not like you, but you are my hero for calling them out on their shit. Everyone else just sees dollar signs and stays quiet. I don't like scammers, and spammers, and I appreciate what you do.

You are a witness to believe in @nextgencrypto

With love,
shello

"Out of all the accounts, I hope that you take this one out first."

The ability of a whale (or anybody bigger than you) to 'take out an account' is why A. serious authors won't invest their time/effort into steem and B. Steem will never hit mass adoption.

Applauding that behavior is not, in my opinion, in any way supporting Steemit.

Serious authors offering genuine content have nothing to fear. Offering bogus "fixes" to "problems" with totally contrived nonsense, however....
I like to think of the user base on this platform to be its own immune system. The people in this post who are heavily opposed to this idea are people who know what they're doing, and most have done it for years now. Their methods may be....interesting....but the point is they react based on the knowledge they have, not because they don't like outsiders or whatever bullshit. Whether or not it looks like it, they've got the platform's best interests in mind here. Ultimately, if someone doesn't want their account "taken out", then it's best not to do something detrimental or scammy to the system. That's pretty much the gist of it.

"Serious authors offering genuine content have nothing to fear."

That's absurd (or at best, false).

Anybody with more clout than their target can end an account.

See @kerriknox's account. Rep from 60+ to -1, earnings per post from $100+ to $0 because she can't post anything because that the downvoter with 300kish steem downvotes it.

It's great to knock down plagerizers etc. Good.

But am I going to rent delegated SP to increase my visibility etc to speed up my account growth/not waste content with no viewers etc just to have berniesanders or equivalent downvote me because he sees I rented delegated SP or did some selfvoting and downvotes all my ' purchased hypocritical votes'? (or some other guy with some other 'self votes' are bad justification)?

Nope. So I, having been here for a couple months wanting to really like steemit, being a content creator in my own business, am going to keep my content building there and am not going to risk wasting time/effort here.

'I' am irrelevant. I say the above because, again, serious content producers aren't going to stick to a platfrom that is so risky, and mass adoption certainly isn't going to happen while it's so risky.

Then I must be in some way privileged, because I don't find it absurd at all. During the time I've been here - since July of last year - I've been flagged only 4 or 5 times at most, and those were usually either bot downvotes for whatever mathematically random reason that didn't amount to any damage, or because someone just disagreed with some trivial thing that was said, kind of as if one of us were to flag the other of us just because we disagreed. It's lame, but it's allowed. I've just avoided the drama and done pretty well, I suppose. I'm not rich by any stretch of the imagination, but I'm not unhappy with what this place has done for me since I've been here. So perhaps it just depends on the perspective we each have and what value we assign to this place on a personal level. I've got art and photography and music for days, so I just keep posting.

So from your perspective, an author with a rep of 60+ and $100+/post having their account destroyed by a single individual is what exactly?

Do you think that steemit is going to thrive when anybody's hard work can be wiped out with no protections or recourse?

Also, you did notice that your 'has nothing to worry about' claim has been proven false, yes?

One has to wonder: what about the post is drawing flags? I have yet to really see someone get flagged for no real reason, as if done by some of the low-rep bots I've seen that do it randomly.

  1. "I have yet to really see someone get flagged for no real reason"

I just showed you an example of that, so you actually have.

I know it breaks the fantasy that on steemit bad things only happen to bad people, but.....

  1. Regardless of #1 above, my view is, it doesn't matter (short of plagerism/copyright infringement).

Nobody's account should be able to be destroyed by a single individual. Why would I spend lots of time/effort if anybody with more clout than me can wipe out the benefits of all that time/effort (and can do it again at any time if I come back and build back up again)?

Currently, I'm not going to, because there's no protections or recourse.

Ultimately, everyone is free to vote however they like. And this has proven to be quite the divisive truth, seeing as how the power of the vote is dependent on the user's level of wealth - literally. Being on the bottom end of that deal is not necessarily the best in the world, and I get that. I'm down here too. My vote means virtually nothing - maybe 6 cents right now. But if you're telling me that anyone can randomly be downvoted by a large whale for absolutely no reason and be obliterated when it happens, I'd have to say I don't agree with that because I and many others who post non-divisive posts don't generally experience that. When you post an opinion, you're going to get people who disagree. That's just a fact of having opinions. It's guaranteed some people will disagree. And with a system where everyone has an up and a downvote option to use however they please, guess what? They're going to use it however they please. And those opinions expressed as votes will also have those who agree and disagree. For these reasons - and for reasons of blood pressure and stress - I avoid topics like religion, politics, controversies and conspiracies, who the whales are upvoting/downvoting, etc etc etc. Outside of Steemit, those things have no bearing on my personal life, so why would I add that stress? It's not worth it. I have problems of my own. Steemit is totally an auxiliary experience for me.

"But if you're telling me that anyone can randomly be downvoted by a large whale for absolutely no reason and be obliterated when it happens, I'd have to say I don't agree with that because I and many others who post non-divisive posts don't generally experience that."

You say that everyone can vote. But they say it doesn't happen because you haven't experienced it? LOL.

I find it funny (bad funny) that people turn a blind eye to 'one guy destroyed this author's successful account' because you all, as far as I can tell, don't like the idea that it can happen to anybody but bad accounts.

What if a good author wants to invest time money and effort into a controversial topic. You're arguing that it's ok for that author's account to get destroyed.

That it's possible is a big big problem for the current and future success and growth of steemit.

Thank you, Bernie!

For this example let’s assume the Hedge-Fund originally buys 100M Steem with 84M USD worth of Cryptocurrency. (...) When the Price of Steem goes from 0.84 to 7 dollars per Steem because of this move, that 100M worth of Steem is now worth 700M.

Such a nonsense wouldn't have ever made it to the trending page without buying the position.

I just wrote an algorithm that naked short sells BTC. I'm going to sell the algorithm to the Citadel tomorrow, so you'd better get out today. :)

i see what your concerns were with a post like this but you could end the bots and still have same problem with the amount of whales that sell their votes and when smts come everyone will be able to sell there voting in some way

This is not about bots, it's about abuse and scam. You may also consider the comments from a bunch of established users here that got much more into detail than I did.

still have same problem with the amount of whales that sell their votes

Amount of whales.. Where do you get these numbers from?

I'm pretty sure SMTs are not invented to encourage vote trading but to strenghthen the overall value of Steem. That's at least what I got from the whitepaper and videos so far.

by the amount of whales is from observations if you check transfers to a few whales that vote a lot you'll see many links with "gifts"

but does it really matter if users buy votes by steem sbd or trading votes is happening everywhere
check trending of #meme #fun #story for easy to see examples of this

didn't say was purpose SMTs were invented for but will allow anyone to sell votes without being seen in transfers

FYI - on Friday I'll have enough SP back to counter all of your purchased hypocritical votes.

Some people fight for noble causes, to bring the Earth and its people to a better place. I see you have other priorities.

I find it genuinely interesting that you find it rude to downvote bots. I'm serious about being genuine: understanding people's value systems is something I really like delving into. What is the source of this perceived rudeness? Basically, I'm asking you directly: why are you spending your most precious resource, time, doing something that counter-acts collective goodness? That doesn't seem like something a rational person does. What do you gain/what do you think you're accomplishing? Why does berniesanders wake up in the morning/what purpose do you want your hands to work towards?

We have actually fostered a relationship with several of the bot owners, so it's not like we're taking what we can get and snubbing the owners. Likewise, we are using this to step into the forefront of Steemit to both grow the entire platform and spread the wealth with our Steemit guild; a process which we have been open and transparent about - even communicating with the developers of the site about the state, growth, and foreseeable problems of the site. From a position of knowledge, I find it very difficult for you to posit a counter argument that does not simultaneously align with the stagnation of the systemic growth of Steemit.

I am glad you are going to take action against this page. They even had the cheek to reach out to my project @paywithsteem asking for a partnership and asked me to send them SBD for it!

It's okay @berniesanders, they just want to tell you who,what,when, and why to vote for someone. After all you are not Smart enough to do it yourself.

Accounts that consistently either like their own content, and/or continuously like the content of the same accounts, and/or continuously like the content of accounts that have been associated as “bots” will lose influence every week. Accounts that consistently like content from users they haven't liked before gain influence.

@berniesanders We'd like to reflect back to you the hateful nature of your perspective. Were doing the best we can to share positivity and fantastic ideas/articles and thoughts with our shared community.

Why do you spend so much of your time and energy attacking us?

the reason you are being chosen, is because you use a tag that has nothing to do with your post, and you are a known spammer \ tag spammer \ plaigerist \ upvotebot abuser. that simple

@inquiringtimes we changed the steemfest tag upon your request. Everything we have ever posted is content owned by the EN. What other methods are we using that you consider to be "spam"?

There are many different people using upvote bots. What in particular is bothering you so much about our usage of up-vote bots?

@berniesanders we found that having all of the bot comments makes it difficult for this article to be used as a conversation thread. We don't see why its rude to hide those comments, will you please elaborate on why you feel it is wrong for us to clear the comment space for other peoples solutions to be more easily seen?

why the heck would you use a dozen upvote bots in the first place? and then flag them? If i sold you a service, and then you flagged me, I wouldn't want you as my customer.... it's just ignorant.

also, ignorant is hitting your post with every upvote service in the steemiverse.

upvote bots are supposed to help you get a bit of visibility, so other people will read your post and decide to vote it or not. you are using them like a junkie... it's quite a bit more socially acceptable to use them sparingly, and make better content if you don't get enough natural votes.

also, you can just upvote the comments you like and then the real comments rise. I prefer a requested bot comment to some of the bs fake comments, tbh. flagging the vote bots that you paid for? smh.....

Maybe the author wanted to hide the fact that he paid for every vote buying service that exists on this platform to bring this piece of content into a trending position. Also the author used (pardon abused) the tag #steemfest and put the word 'minnow support' in the headline to improve visibility. This author pratices everythig but no minnow support.
The tag abuse might be even an interesting issue for @steemcleaners.

Actually, we decided to do it because we noticed there was an inverse relationship between bot comments and human commenters. We wanted more human commenters to participate in order to give people a voice on the topics we are bringing to Steemit.

This author pratices everythig but no minnow support.

This is untrue. Our Steemit guild is designed to support as many people who participate in it. We share our upvotes in strategic sessions, boosting people's content frequently. We're helping a lot of smaller accounts rise up and gain followers quickly.

Dear all,
I make a facebook group for steemit Vot and Comment. evrybody can join in my group. this is the Click the linke ill add you https://m.me/join/AbYsEkpXB2Ys7ahN

this is also spam, and a dangerous thread to be commenting irrelevant material.

There's no hiding the usage of upvote bots. We've removed the steemfest tag upon your request @surfermarly.

We have alot to offer minnnows. We even made a free academy we made for minnows and were developing guild software to support more authors in being seen https://awakening-sovereignty-collective.teachable.com/p/steemit-academy

A simpler way would have been to offer upvotes to human replies and actually help people. Instead, it was chosen to slap the bots.

I didn't request to remove the tag, you were abusing it to get more visibility.

Funny enough that you promote "authenticity" in your super academy, while you are practicing the complete opposite by yourself:

While there are many strategies you can employ, the most common is just being authentic and building relationships with people who are interesting to you. Writers on Steemit are making good money by doing just that.

Check out my account @steemaniacs and you will notice: everything that you are pretending to do was already invented and honestly (!) practiced long time before you started.

Actions speak louder than words and this community has an eye on your doings now. Good luck!

Well said mate.

Actually, this is quite funny. Our media agency has noticed that there is an inverse relationship between the number of bot comments and the number of human comments. The more bot comments there are, the less likely people seem to want to comment. Since it is the people we want to get in touch with, to create a relationship with the audience here before our Beta-launch in December, we wanted to encourage commenters as much as possible. We think it's important to create these relationships now, to show how authentic we are, as a side-effect of flipping the switch of our advertising potential is a significant adoption of Steemit by a wider audience.

I find it really interesting that this causes such an emotional reaction in people, which is self-evident by the changes in their written diction when compared to other comments they make. I have to question why that is. What specifically perturbs you about any of the concerns you bring up?

Personally, I feel the majority of people acting negatively are doing so unconsciously: that drama has been stirred up and everyone wants to jump on board and participate in the bashing. It is the thanatos of human nature that desires to call someone a junkie and willingly jumps on such an opportunity that seems favorable without social ramifications of doing so. Because it doesn't make sense that someone who aligns with esoteric philosophy to stand opposed to an organization that is actively promoting esoteric principles in alignment with highest collective good. Logically, in the big picture, it seems most likely that your concerns are arising from a short-sighted position that is not taking into consideration all the potential implications of the Earth Nation actions. Obviously, it's not an us vs them conflict, but to oppose us is to oppose an organization which actively strives to make the world a better place, and has a history of being transparent in how it is achieving this in a manner that grows the site and spreads the wealth with our steemit guild.

In my opinion, that's where real ignorance lies.

the real reason people comment less when there are a lot of bot comments, is because if you have to pay so many bots for your content to be popular, then your content must not be very good. so people see all the bots and think, why does the author think it's so valueless they must pay 10 bots to vote for it, hmm it must not be good content, I won't engage.

pass that on to your media consultants, free of charge.

flagging your paid advertisers is like giving a spanking to people who helped you. I know quite a few bot developers, and I will make sure they know this happens, so they can stop servicing people who "reward" their service with a downvote.

We put the smallest amount of down-vote in to the comments of those bots @inquiringtimes to clear the space for more room for dialogue.

We recommend that upvote bots set an option to not have them auto-comment or a smaller comment box so it doesn't take up so much space.

If our 1 cent flags are somehow harming the bots themselves, we'd be happy to upvote comments to offset the loss.

You can say it's bad logic, but I know these things from a few months of digging deep. This whole site is a deep well of knowledge, first thing first, etiquette. Flags are not to be used in an idle fashion. They are akin to throwing a glove on the ground or taking your glasses off and handing to a friend. It's asking for a fight. If you had been paying attention, there is quite a bit of controversy over the use of bots and providing the service. It's best left for minnows and people who don't have visibility. Now you've opened up Pandora's box. The best way to proceed is to speak softly, and pay more attention to how the rest of the community behaves. Just like in any community. You have a chance to redeem yourself, it's just going to be harder. All eyes are on you now. Cite your images. Reference quotes, stay clear of any hint of plagairism

You are really nailing this dialog man, it's a joy to behold :D

the real reason people comment less when there are a lot of bot comments, is because if you have to pay so many bots for your content to be popular, then your content must not be very good.

This is very poor logic. Given that any content we have produced is met with a large positive reception, it is safe to say that the content we produce is good.

In fact, the only negative thing people can find about our content is that we use bots. I think that's a pretty solid argument that our content has some sort of quality associated with it.

why does the author think it's so valueless they must pay 10 bots to vote for it, hmm it must not be good content, I won't engage.

Again, poor logic. One must ask how we got 800+ followers in a couple short weeks. Because we used bots, we gathered a sizable following quickly. That's decent engagement.

We aren't trying to reach people who act unconsciously and walk away from an article for reasons other than the content of the article itself. The people who would act on reflex to someone using bots are not thinking critically. It's much more beneficial to focus on attracting a following of conscious individuals who realize the use and downvoting of bots is a meaningless detail when compared to everything we are manifesting.

"I was going to walk into the mission and help feed starving people, but I would have had to step on the grass to do so."

flagging your paid advertisers is like giving a spanking to people who helped you

If I paid money for a car, and the dealer slapped a big sticker on the windshield, I would take the sticker off. The dealership has my money, so me removing their ad from the product I bought has no bearing on the dealership.

good luck with that.

@earthnation, I believed censorship is a bad thing and that Steem should be an okay place for everyone to get together and collaborate as a community.

You're ridiculing this principle just by being here on Steemit. For the good of the rewards pool and for the good of our community, please stop milking upvote bots and promoting spammy content.

If this guy is honest about helping minnows, then self voting would be beneficial since his steem power will get a boost.

you seem to be confused about how it all works