Botting and Self Upvoting: time for a healthy debate

in steemit •  last month

What's wrong in self upvoting? And what's wrong in using the bots: I thought both of these were cool concepts. It's important we have a healthy debate around these two topics. Some level of commercialism is good for this platform. As long as we do not introduce straight forward advertising, I'm perfectly fine with these two features.

I read @brandonscalera 's piece: https://steemit.com/steemit/@brandonscalera/the-easiest-way-to-get-paid-consistently-on-steemit
Following this piece, he's powered down and moved his funds out to prove a point. His point is to blog everyday. That's true, but he's critical of self upvoting at some levels and some of his followers have critcised him for using bots and most of them have flayed self upvoting. Heres my take on them both:

Upvoting
A) You got to like what you write and post first before someone else likes it. If you don't like what you are writing, who else will? When you are not sure, it's always a good idea to leave it to the market and test what happens. But generally speaking, there's nothing wrong in patting your own back. I hate it when people flay self upvoting. They make you feel as if you have betrayed the community. As a new comer, every drop counts and every pat on your back counts. So with that philosophy, I will encourage others to do the same without feeling bad about it.

B) Bots: It's entertaining to use Bots
There's nothing immoral about using bots. I don't spend a lot of money there. But Every day I spend a few minutes botting. I try and move AUD 20 into my Steemit account everyday. I believe in building this platform brick by brick. This is a very cool pass-time for me. It's not illegal, it's not immoral, it's just commercial. Don't forget there's not much advertising here. If you do not allow some level of commercialism, the rich will move away to other platforms. We got to keep the rich here. That's my theory. So if Jerry Banfield is selling his votes and if other rich are setting their votes up for bids in the market, I say it's good. Commercialise it, but let's keep the transparency factor alive.

I wish I had enough funds to spend more on botting as this would push up my ranking on trending articles. It's pretty much like boosting your article on Facebook. This is not the best environment, but with thousands of articles flowing in everyday, what's the best alternative? Boosting is blatant advertising and self-promotion. Botting is fun!

If you have any other opinion that can change my mind, please drop a line below. I'd like to hear your thoughts.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  trending

I'll answer your two questions with 1 word - abuse.

People self vote garbage posts to an amount that would take you about 1000 self votes.

People buy votes for garbage posts for hundreds of dollars multiple times a day.

The reward pool is limited. So lets say for example, it gives out $100 - if one person has claimed $10 with a cat meme, then there's only $90 left for everyone else. Everybody else suffers.

I've used bots, and probably will again, but I'm trying to reduce my reliance on them - because it does make commercial sense, even if not when you consider the wider economy.

Upvoting I think only becomes an issue as the amounts grow larger. The idea behind an upvote is to share rewards around to those that put in effort and produce quality, not just to give yourself a passive income for very little effort

·

Very valid points @farq. In many ways people who have joined steemit before us have an advantage. I agree anyone and everyone can use bots and destroy the rewards pool. But how else can we grow quicker. You need something like bots or boost. I know it's easily corruptible, but what's the solution? Total organic growth is hard when you have millions of users vying for readership. I see this as a platform that can offer credible opportunities for content creators. Facebook has failed on this front. Unless they launch a different platform and bring in rewards and go on blockchain, things won't happen. I've heard EOS is planning social media and rewards pool very soon. This will be Steemit's first competition. Let's see how this all shapes up. But hey,,,stay in touch. Are you based in Melbourne?

·
·

It is hard no doubt. The platform isn't perfect, and they really need to improve content discoverability. If they had similar functionality to Reddit I'd be confident of doing very well here.

And I absolutely agree that people here earlier have a huge advantage

The hope is if it keeps growing, that some people will be saying that about us.

EOS is actually a product of the same guy that started Steem.

Yeah I am based in Melbourne. You?

·
·
·

Yep, me too. Based in Melbourne. Williamstown for now...We got to catch up for a coffee sometime...Ye i know that EOS is built by the same guy...I'm hoping that it's going to be a healthy competition. More social media on blockchain will chain the scene for facebook. Old school social media has to change. It's ridiculous the amount of profits they make. Facebook paid 70k GST last year. It's insane. They've smashed all other publishers ...

This post has received a 2.49 % upvote from @boomerang.

Admire your honesty in this explosive topic. Using bots are good but not when bots start reaping minnows off with excuse if bid based bot and advertising more on your space after you paid already. More annoying it seems they share in the reward payouts too . Self upvotes, selling of SP and bot has turned steemit into whale / rich empire. Folks hardly read and curate good contents as such many don't go to feeds any.ore to read and check out those to upvote as sp is sold to the highest bidder unlike before when you write good posts and followers usually comment and upvote . Anyways tks for sharing. Let's keep in touch and hope for the best here.

·

@kenhudoy: you have a point. To increase reputation, I've realised the best and quickest way is to invest and route it though the bots so you can ramp up your reputation. I used to blog three times a day but my reputation was going up very slow. I'm quite serious about this platform and to build it may ages if I dont have a mechanism to do it. In Facebook you can increase likes by paying for it. You can boost your articles to get read, etc. On Steemit, bots do the same job but in a different way. Yes, we need to debate and reform this platform. It has glitches. But if you are taking away Bots, you need to give publishers something else that can help them grow their presence rapidly. I have a facebook page that I use for work. I grew it to 20,000 likes by paying for it. Although it took me years, I built it and I have an interactive audience. Organic growth is a myth. Just like any business, you would have to invest. The trick is to grow it slowly by putting in what you can afford. Of course If I had 20k to shell out tomorrow, i'll move it here and ramp up my activity a bit more. Unfortunately I don't have that kind of funds and all i can do is move 20 bucks when i can and that's mostly every day. Good luck kenhudoy. Thanks for dropping by

·
·

Sure and tour points are germane. I also manage many pages in Facebook one if them food clinic with approx 70k likes which I built mainly by posting on many pages gradually to build and refer followers. Takes time, efforts but cheaper than paying for likes as I see Facebook as reapoff. To reach my followers I have to pay big time to boost a post. Steemit is far better except that whales are turning the platform into bidders paradice. Before bot, folks do keep reading and curating from feeds mainly. So if u manage to build ur followers above 1k reasonable guys, then you ok here but not anymore. That's my point. Let's keep in touch

·
·
·

True. So what your saying is we will still struggle to achieve something even if we go over 1000 followers...Probably boosting your voting power may help? and Of course investing into bid bots. But dont forget this is something we can do too as the platform grows....

·
·
·
·

Sure
Boosting voting power and investing in bots helps individual but does it favor the community at large especially new members ? My posts survive tks to bots if not it can't get anywhere hot. Before it was not like this as curation was in Vogue and if you work your followers to certain number then you ok. But now, even folks with rep of above 70, if they don't use bot, most don't get the attention they deserve which also was not like this earlier. I am not against bid based bot I use it daily but I prefer we move back to community based curation where efforts through building followers and curating interesting contents was in Vogue. But is it workable now, not sure as the whales control the bot and you can't stop them from their huge profits. Capitalism at its best and not community driven which is more socialist. Just hope eos can join the system and provide a better option then steemit will sit up.
Let's keep in touch.