Good post @stellabelle. But I think the real question is why so many whales voted for @msgivings from the start to the last post? I can only go back and see 4 weeks of her posts, but it's pretty often the same whales. Bots and following bots? Probably. But it's not what you would hope for in content curation.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I found myself wondering this as well, @nubchai. Whether or not @msgivings was writing easy rants as a bot or not, I think that what was perceived as "quality" in them was more like attitude. Remember Tay, the Microsoft bot who started saying incendiary things after people intentionally messed with it? Some of those tweets were shockingly hilarious. While it's true that there are memes and jokes that do well on Steemit and should not be prevented from doing so, I have to ask:
Is a rant with a strong attitude worth so much?
Should we all stop bothering to do research or open up and just flame our most controversial opinions? Is that really adding value? Is that what Steemit wants to be?
Before they trended, I commented on a few of those posts trying to inspire her(him?) to increase the power of unsupported opinion with a rounded view, references to books, personal confessional stories etc. I honestly thought they would need that to do well. (I haven't read all the posts, so maybe some are better than the ones I commented on). But...No response. AND serious success.
I know it's a different case, but when @lukestokes asked @sean-king to support a claim, @sean-king wrote a whole article supporting the claim. That's what community that values quality looks like. Even though @sean-king is well-known here and doesn't need to improve his writing or argumentation to be rewarded for what are often deeply impressive articles, he engages with challenges. I'm not saying that everybody should have to respond to every comment, but it builds community whenever anyone does. Those who are here as parasites to get what they can and run are unlikely to be contributing as citizens. I admit it gets my goat that someone who showed little interest in being a real person on Steemit was so consistently and overwhelmingly rewarded, whether or not their writing was generated by a bot.
I agree. I think the AI creation of "content" is less of an issue than the consistent upvoting of suspect posts by people with a LOT of steem powere and their bots.
I totally agree, @nubchai. Thanks for responding. :)
https://steemit.com/steemit/@razvanelulmarin/msgivings-frequent-trending-authors-has-been-exposed-for-plagiarism-the-question-remains-is-this-what-steemit-wants-to-be did you read this?
Voting bots are what the curent system promotes.