Dan doesn't care about that when he downvotes people. If he doesn't like something, he hides it from everyone else with his downvote and there's no recourse. Why should we afford him a higher standard?
Great idea.
Requiring a reply to vote would help solve this and encourage more discussion. Up or down, you gotta say something!
Then the bot makers would have to put effort into making relevant replies, or the account would be outed as a bot.
As long as we don't know who operates the bot (or it's someone who doesn't care about his reputation), the operator can simply let the bot spam something. In the worst case it'd just add massive amounts of spam to the chain without changing anything in voting behavior :/
Yes, that is correct. But that is a completely different problem that hasn't even been discussed yet.
Step one to dealing with trolls and spammers (and bots) will be to identify them. Forcing them to speak to get curation rewards would help.
I know which bots have me in their list. But I also know most of their operators, so the issue I thought of may not be that big at all.
Still think it's risky to force posts, if it's abused new users will be seriously wondering why all posts have spam below them...at least the bots are quite right now.
Outing them is not the issue. The main problem with bots is their fast auto-voting to get an early position in the list of curators. We already know who that is, because they vote so fast that they're even quicker than the author in a lot of cases.
It sounds like you only have upvote bots. what if they were autodownvoting everything you posted? wouldn't you want it to comment so you could out it as a bot?
I did not suggest forcing anything, simply that if you want to vote and get rewards from it, it requires some conversation.
If its abused, then it becomes time to deal with the persistent troll\spam\bot account problem. (that is next in line anyway)
I think voting bots which upvote posts by authors can be banned (let's say for 24 hours) by blockchain logic because we have all required data in blockchain. All other bots, not so scary.
^ IMPOSTER ^
^ Since people are still upvoting this sheister
Seems like you're baiting voters who can't see the extra e in your name.
Why would a bot get the spelling of an account name wrong?
Edit: please don't upvote this (my) post any more, since the fake account will get a portion of the rewards.
But what about discussion which we have here? If we downwote, it's will be hidden from peoples.
This "fake" account belong to Dan anyway.
Dan doesn't care about that when he downvotes people. If he doesn't like something, he hides it from everyone else with his downvote and there's no recourse. Why should we afford him a higher standard?
I don't think Dan mined an account with his named misspelled and copied some stuff from Wikipedia.
Great idea.
Requiring a reply to vote would help solve this and encourage more discussion. Up or down, you gotta say something!
Then the bot makers would have to put effort into making relevant replies, or the account would be outed as a bot.
As long as we don't know who operates the bot (or it's someone who doesn't care about his reputation), the operator can simply let the bot spam something. In the worst case it'd just add massive amounts of spam to the chain without changing anything in voting behavior :/
Yes, that is correct. But that is a completely different problem that hasn't even been discussed yet.
Step one to dealing with trolls and spammers (and bots) will be to identify them. Forcing them to speak to get curation rewards would help.
I know which bots have me in their list. But I also know most of their operators, so the issue I thought of may not be that big at all.
Still think it's risky to force posts, if it's abused new users will be seriously wondering why all posts have spam below them...at least the bots are quite right now.
Outing them is not the issue. The main problem with bots is their fast auto-voting to get an early position in the list of curators. We already know who that is, because they vote so fast that they're even quicker than the author in a lot of cases.
It sounds like you only have upvote bots. what if they were autodownvoting everything you posted? wouldn't you want it to comment so you could out it as a bot?
I did not suggest forcing anything, simply that if you want to vote and get rewards from it, it requires some conversation.
If its abused, then it becomes time to deal with the persistent troll\spam\bot account problem. (that is next in line anyway)
why are we not suppposed to upvote?
dantheeman
Imho try posting some random drivel on your account and see what % of it is upvoted compared to the legitimate content you post.
Then we can establish a baseline from where we can draw some relevant conclusions.
Downvoted for impersonation
I think voting bots which upvote posts by authors can be banned (let's say for 24 hours) by blockchain logic because we have all required data in blockchain. All other bots, not so scary.
Here is an Archive of Cryptocurrency App building Code on Github for anyone creating a Steemit app
https://steemit.com/steem/@marsresident/github-cryptocurrency-app-creation-archive
Congratulations @dantheeman! You have received a personal award!
Click on the badge to view your Board of Honor.
Congratulations @dantheeman! You received a personal award!
You can view your badges on your Steem Board and compare to others on the Steem Ranking
Vote for @Steemitboard as a witness to get one more award and increased upvotes!