I understand, and there will always be a demand for wanting votes. However, I don't think vote buying services should extort money from the vulnerable. (Yes, dramatic effect) Instead, they should do what the system was designed to - curation.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Personally I love what @treeplanter is doing. They banned self-voting and lost 80% of the donations they were getting. (https://steemit.com/nature/@treeplanter/i-lost-more-than-80-of-donations-because-i-banned-self-voting-i-will-give-you-200-upvote-of-your-donation-till-my-vp-get-80)
The bot is there to help fund the planting of trees in a Forrest in Cameron.(http://kedjom-keku.com/en/) I think it's a great social initiative and a perfect example of what upvote bots really should be. No self-voting means you are doing it for somebody. A @treeplanter vote is better than a straight donation to the content creator as the vote is worth more than the SBD invested. Additionally, half of the money spent goes to plant trees. $1 is 1 tree planted on our planet to create a greener and better future.