Steem has a major vulnerability that will eventually crash the economic value of steem. This same vulnerability makes it difficult for new authors to get started on steem, which is the single most important factor for mainstream adoption.
The problem is that steem users are not incentivized to consistently find new authors to follow and upvote. In fact, the system seems to encourage users to focus entirely on upvoting their own posts, and the posts of friends that return the favor.
Since there is no penalty for building totally automated likebot networks, it is encouraging investors to put money into steem for the singular purpose of upvoting their own content to gain a ROI. The more investors that use steem in this way without interacting with the rest of the community, the less value steem will hold in the global market. Eventually, if enough investors are turning their accounts into ROI bot-cows, the market will become flooded with steem that not enough people want, because normal users arn't making enough money..... because the whales with the real steem power are mostly giving it to themselves to resell.
How do we solve this? I have an solution that will fix this vulernability AND give more funds to starting steem authors. This solution is a new steem variable..... For this example, lets call it "Steem Influence".
Steem influence would act as a multiplier to steem power. If a user only upvotes their own content and the content of their friends, their influence will slowly drop. To regain influence, the user must upvote the content of other users whom they have never interacted with before.
Here is an example formula to implement this solution.
-5 out of every 20 upvotes must be given to users whom the upvoter has only interacted with at most 5 times in the last 3 months.
-1 out of every 20 upvotes must be given to a user whom the upvoter has never interacted with before.
-For every 20 votes that the user makes that do not meet the above criteria, the users Steem Influence Score drops by one point.
-Every user starts at 100% influence. As their influence drops, so to does their steem power. Down to a minimum of 40% total voting power.
-To regain influence the user must interact with new users whom they haven't interacted with before.
These numbers are just an example of a functional algorithm. I'm sure all those numbers can and should be fine tuned before implementation.
I want to hear your solutions for this problem. My solution is not the only way. I'll be upvoting my favorite solutionary comments to this thread. I invite you to do the same.
I also invite you to tag any developers you know. We wish to talk to them.
We represent a media alliance with over 10 million followers. We are very interested in bringing steem to the mainstream, and we have the channels to do so. We want to know if the steem developers will work with us to bring steem to the point where we can post about it on sites like https://www.facebook.com/CollectiveEvolutionPage/.
It's an honor to be here with you my fellow Steemian. Lets bring Steem to the Mainstream! Together!
I would love for this thread to be about all kinds of solutions for steemit! I will be upvoting good solutions and following the authors providing them. I invite you to do the same.
Speaking of solutions! Our Earth Nation team made a Free Steemit Academy! Check it out at https://awakening-sovereignty-collective.teachable.com/p/steemit-academy.
Heres another solution! We made the EN steemit upvote guild. By joining our team you receive;
We are developing a new kind of software system to allow any other group on steemit to create their own guild with huge benefits. These guilds will have interoperability functionalities to create maximum synergy and engagement between Steemians.
Were testing out our guild system as a core group for about 30 days before we open it up to all of steemit.
Um ...clue me in, Im new here, how exactly do we upvote?
This comment has received a 1.11 % upvote from @buildawhale thanks to: @earthnation. Send at least 0.50 SBD to @buildawhale with a post link in the memo field for a portion of the next vote.
To support our daily curation initiative, please vote on my owner, @themarkymark, as a Steem Witness
You have collected your daily Power Up! This post received an upvote worth of 0.85$.
Learn how to Power Up Smart here!
This.Is.My.Vote.
#upvote
Hooray for Steemy Bohemians of the New Earth!!@!!@!!@!!@!!@!!@!!
We can talk about this on the #BeyondBitcoin #Whaletank, please RSVP tomorrow on @officialfuzzy or any time and let me know, I'd like to address this too. It's either a HF or going to #EOS for example.
Only prob is this assumes bots cannot simply make new accounts using anonsteem to start carousel voting.
I remember when fyrstikken had this cool bot that "upvoted all new accounts" to "help users". He went around asking whales to support and delegate sp to it because it would "help minnows so much".
But at that time he was buddies with noganoo and noganoo had a bunch of sockpuppets. I always thought it was a but odd that someone who threatens to kill others, ruin their lives and hire people to beat them up would be "so for the people"...and this is i suspect why he was promoting it.
So this solution as i see it (unless im missing something) just gives them incentive to say "now your delegation will make us lots more money on all these fake accounts we have joining steem. The circle jerk needs to evolve though".
I do not think reputation systems should be on the chain itself. In fact what should happen is that different sites (like busy for instance) should set up their own reputation systems that use blockchain data.
Well I disagree with you there, exactly reputation systems should be open. But that said, if your are going to do analytics on your database will you store it in the same database i.e. the blockchain? Is that what is normally done? I guess reputation is accumulated so that would be a yes then.
Very good explanation. . Good job @fuzzyvest.
I don't know if it is really viable to always be connecting with new authors. Say for example you have 20 authors you really like and you really only got so much time to tune into so much.
I think some of the concentration of wealth is a result of many people who've been here awhile. I think over time there will be more distribution. Another thing is that cryptocurrency is brand new to many new users of the platform...and many new users have not taken the plunge to invest into their accounts. It's not that you have to invest in your account by purchasing steem....but everyone who does purchase steem does in fact help grow the value of the network.
Cool concept of starting at 100 rep and going from there. Though not sure that's a good indicator either because reputation is built over time...though i guess with approach outlined to hold a solid rep rating you would have to keep at it....though with the approach you outlined it would definitely create false positives in terms of reputation,,,which would actually not really be a true indicator of the legitimacy of an individuals rep.
The real value here is in community, that is for sure. The community is large and will grow larger...in a way it makes sense that "tribes" develop so to speak of core groups of people that regularly support one another..I mean it's pretty cool...it takes time to cultivate and develop such relationships. It's something I would like to work on for myself.
I think there is value in not having too much rule or enforcement. Reminds me of lao tzu and how he speaks about rules and laws of a society/community....where the less rules and laws - the more prosperous the society/community is.
welcome to steemit :)
Hi @worldclassplayer. Thank you!
Something that would make implimenting this idea easy for everyone.... would be to use a curation system to delegate a few votes a day to a curator who specalizes in finding new authors! This would enable everyone to keep their influence at 100% on autopilot while also maximizing on their curation rewards.
options/opportunity for delegates and delegation is cool and practical as a general point.
the 100% influence point - will have to let that sink in for a bit and play around with it.
Good idea! I've also written about this 6 days long ago and came to the same conclussion-sollution as you! Coincidence? : )
I must agree with you @worldclassplayer "I think there is value in not having too much rule or enforcement." I have only been on Steemit for one month so obviously not as experienced with the entire operation. What caused me to even look at Steemit was the fact it was a community based platform which embraces the whole. The $cryptocurrency is a big plus as it moves us away from the central banks, but was not my deciding factor.
From what I can see thus far is that the Steemit platform is more of a "pay for performance" strategy and that appeals to me. I am moving away from a social network that has taken it upon itself to censor and manipulate their platform in such a way it is not beneficial to put together work teams or even for an individual to exercise their right to free speech.
Here I feel the community will monitor their own community. If our performance is worthy,we benefit. If it is not, we do not benefit. This should eventually take care of alot of the househeeping issues on its own. I may change my mind later down the road as the platform grows and changes as it surely will, but for now I see no need to commandeer new rules and restrictions.
I only hope that which ever direction we take that peace be the journey, @vickiebarker
Yes, Yes, and Yes @vickiebarker and @worldclassplayer. I agree with all points you have both shared and resonated with.
And, i want to bring to your awareness.... If steem continues like this its currency value is going to tank to the point where potentially it will become nearly impossible to sell.
Even if mathmatics and economics are not your specalialty..... please stay with me as i try to explain this.
A users steem power when upvoting increases the value of a post by 1 cent per 100 dollars worth of steem. 1000 dollars is 10 cents. 10000 dollars is 1 dollar. 1 million dollars is 100 dollars. 100 million dollars is 10000 dollars.
If each user can vote 10 times a day at full power, thats 100k dollars worth of steem each day for a 100 million dollar investment. Thats 36.5M dollars a year. A 3 year ROI. Thats OFF THE HOOK. When steem gets big investors WILL BE ALL OVER THIS.
If an agency put a billion dollars into steemit, they would produce 365 million dollars worth of steemit a year.
If multiple agencies put a combined 10 billion into steem, they would produce 3.65 billion dollars worth of steemit a year.
Do you know what would happen then? The price of steem would plummet and no one would be able to cash out their currency, because theres 100s of billions of dollars of steem on the market and not nearly enough money out there to buy it.......
Please.... Do you see how this math stacks up? Here at the Earth Nation, we very seriously want to bring millions of users into steem..... We can't the way it is now though, because we know that investors out there will flood the market as soon as they feel confident about their return based on current algorithms.
Please help us fix this vulnerability so we can start bringing our greater networks into this project. One way or another this must be fixed or it will crash the steemit network exchange value and make steem close to worthless.
mmm not sure about that maybe you can expand or clarify.
If 10's of billion of dollars come into steem.....and many of those steem are into steem power....that's locking a lot of the steem power up.
sounds like the thinking highlighted in your concern is that if billions of dollars come in from investors/agencies that we will eventually flood the market and dump it ....which would crash it. This sounds like an ineffective approach from the investor/agency perspective.
I think the point perhaps being missed here is that with increased user adoption and also investor increases...we have multiple compounding network effects....which would likely result in more trading/exchanging within the network...the more a thing is recognized as having value the less one has to "try" to sell it or convert it into something else to be able to actually use it.
curious to here your perspective.
This way of thinking is a bit flawed and here is why.. Lets say you try to buy 1 billion $ worth steem to convert to steem power.. That will affect the price of each steem coin tremendously, price per steem will skyrocket! Next time when you try to buy 1 billion $ worth of steem you will get much less steem coins! Do you see what I am getting at? It seems like you base your argument on static steem price?
And yes I agree with you we need a way to "explore" new authors "quality" posts, without spending hours after hours! I can imagine that it must be frustrating for new authors to get noticed by people with impactful SP!
Next question is who decides which post is a “quality” post? Everyone have different interests/agenda. We need a mechanism to incentivize people to find new "quality" posts but not by forcing anyone to do so. If someone can program an algorithm that fact checks peoples posts would be awesome :D
Maybe if we have a similar system like “witnesses”. If we can vote for steemians that we have similar tastes with and find reliable in every single tag/topic that you are interested in and they get paid to find new authors that they might think that you would like. That might save a lot of time for many people. I am a bit drunk atm and I thought that I had to comment on this reply: D I will get back to you tomorrow!
Yes, we should have a delegated curation team (DCT) per niche where they are voted in monthly by members of the community.
Exactly.. how will we pay for them tho?
They should automatically receive a percentage of the steem reward pool. They should be rated by delegated members and based on that rating, it influences their stake of the reward.
Sounds like a reasonable solution to the evident problem.
Time is the biggest factor for most however. As much as I would love to consistently find the great work of unrecognised authors, to do so would require a fair bit of time. The incentive should not be simply to upvote the work of a stranger, but to upvote the GREAT work of a stranger.
To simplify this process would help. Like a curation group who resteem quality posts receiving little attention into one account where we can take our pick.
Have upped & resteemed this for extra exposure. It is certainly a subject worth discussing.
I suspect there will be some big changes announced at SteemFest next month.
Thank you for your support and resonance @samstonehill.
I agree, a curation group, or even multiple creation groups for different catagories would be very helpful to reduce the amount of time spent looking through content.
Another way to simplify this process.... would be to use an automation system that delegates a few votes each day to a curator who specifically targets new and different users consistantly. Through the application we are building this will be an easy process. In fact, it will be effortless(after setup) to have a curator that matches your style to delegate your choice of votes to each day.
Thank you for your support Samstonehill~! May we discover and impliment how to bring this platform to the mainstream.
There is build-a-whale for this
Another aspect to this is what is one legitimately operates in a small circle. What I mean is if one is interested in a subject that isnt widely popular, there might be only a few people on here who are interested in that topic. Hence, all voting would be among them.
For example, if bird watching was one's interest, is there a wide variety of people commenting on that subject? It might be just where someone chooses to steem and, suddenly, they are penalized.
A intelligent and thoughtful perspective @taskmaster4450.
Yes... In a case use such as this.... Someone into a exceptionally niche subject would either have to delegate a few votes to a curator.... or would have to expand into another subject. Or they would become penalized.
In this case.... to me, this seems to be a question of the lesser of two negatives. Should we save the bird watchers from a penalty, at the expense of the entire steem ecosystem? Would that serve the bird watchers if steem lost its economic value to an a flooding of steem on the market?
Perhaps.... there is another way? Yet.... we have not been able to discover it yet. So, until a better solution is presented....
Should we forgo penalizing niche circles at the expense of the entire steem network?
Yes. THERE IS AN EVIDENT PROBLEM. I noticed that in a program, Steem Voter. I did not see any help from them. Like many programs online.
hello sir. I have an idea that you could help have a reach more than me: a simple "choose" button next to the upvote designed to send the post to a curator group that only other steemians can use.
Instead of going to discord to promote your post, other users can do it for you! We can also bring discord on a click away while being on steemit.
It's like the "promote" button but free and with a targeted curator team that will choose how worth is the post and upvote it accordingly.
There could also be a sub-menu that will pop out when clicking on "choose" where you can select the tags or the curator team you want the post to be addressed on like for example a "choose-for-art" tag or "choose-for-curatorteam1" and so on...
Regarding the bots problem eventually abusing the button then we will have made a "trap" for those bots/users where they click for their own fate more like a rat-trap for abusers and scammers.
people like @sherlockholmes and @spaminator even @steemcleaners would have an easier job collecting those "predators" as they would fall into them by their own act
So in the end one would chose wisely and honestly who should be on the curator's eye
I just thought right this moment that a "choosenot" button could also be implemented right next to "chose" for the reason mentioned above in this post of reducing or limiting one's influence
"chose" could also be very well "influence"
As someone who is brand new to Steemit it, I couldn't agree more. I'm very excited to become part of the collective and have managed to connect with some great content makers already however, it's only by sifting through a lot of what I can only describe as rubbish. I class myself as an adventurer and photographer but I'm struggling to find the great content I expected to. I'm assuming it's there but I'm having to plough my way through too much of what I'm assuming is auto-generated content to find the hidden gems. And there are some real hidden gems out there so think a curation group is a really great idea.
Agree with you.... Its been barely a month for me on steem and I can already feel the presence of whales and hoarders and how they are making money fast...
The rich gets richer here only. There needs to be an upgrade.
Excellent idea @earthnation the problems always arise when people see an easy way to make a quick return. The whole essence of Steem should be about finding new subjects within the community that could be of interest for you. This could be a way to get only get back if you put the correct effort in and give back.
You are right. To get this to a different level and get Steem to a higher value, they should implement a way of enhancing the social spirit among members. Otherwise, people have the tendency of follow those whose numbers are higher. Good point. Upvote. And resteemit, so your thought are read by more people.
This is a strong argument for a great idea. Well done!
I hope it will be considered by @ned and users will be incentivized to interact with new people on a weekly basis in the curation rewards.
I agree, the system is become anti-human or antisocial even with all these bots- Im not against bots, indeed, we are all going to have to get used to them.Perhaps limiting the amount of accounts someone can have as well as the number of bots? -
I love the influence idea of having to vote for new users, an excellent way and one that should be seriously looked at in any new fork in the future.
Your suggestion could address one problem but there are others than voting. The fact tgat interaction through comments on this platform is not rewarded, worries me a lot more. Your suggestion applied to comments to other (new) authors could be valuable. You would get influence through commenting on:
A) new authors
B) your comments getting sub comments from other (new) authors
Unfortunately the platform allows bots and this is not penalized. I see spamprofiles with a total of 142 comments (all spam) and a profile score of 57 because their comments were upvoted automatically.
I was enthusiastic about Steemit for a while made more than 800 contributions 30 + articles and a hell of a lot thoughtful and long comments. My profile is at 50 still...
Sigh, moving on to the next platform. I just don't see any commitment from Steemit Inc to keep users happy.
The problem with rewarding comments is that this will increase the comment spam problem not decrease it.
I would suggest that when there are bots that spam comments and votes...there should be the more bots that punish comment spam and auto votes. The steem blockchain has the tools to regulate itself with flagging content if you find enough stakeholders for the good cause this will improve the experience.
By the way, SteemIt Inc can't directly change those rules, this can only be done by the witnesses. And they are elected by all members together.
I agree if the metric is simply the comment #, what should be rewarded is the (organic) interaction a comment generates.
Does it generate subcomments? are those comments upvoted.
but I agree it is difficult to put in place rules that can´t be gamed by automation.
Flagging is a miserable failure as far as I can tell:
you can´t manually flag automated behaviour
flagging sets you up for retaliation flags, so no one bothers
Dissenting opinions are flagged by whale profiles, so no healthy debate is possible
as far as I can tell, flagging is not steering behaviours consistently
Overall I´d say the platform as is, is screwed in the medium term, unless some serious attention is paid to improving the overall user experience. But Steemit Inc. obviously is not interested in getting this out of Beta, they are gunning for the big bucks by inventing an ICO bypass with their media token.
I think that strategy is seriously flawed, sure it might make the token more valuable but if that attracts even more users (and bots) to the platform in it´s current state it might mean the whole thing will collapse more quickly. The whole concept is shoddy as a social network and it simply won´t survive a huge influx of new users because it will only make the overall user experience worse for everyone. So people come, try it, don´t get results, decide they don´t like it and abandon it... Really hoping for some magical rabbit out of the hat to be announced at Steemfest...
I can agree with the analysis about the problem but I think it can be solved. It might take time but I see so many ppl working and thinking about the solution. Also many of the whales because it’s in their long term interest to.
I hope so . There seems to be some movement now with the redesign. Need to explore it still. Really hope it is more than some new colours....
I hope it is fixable but it needs to become a priority... a social media token with a crappy social media experience simply won't take off...
One thing they did not bother to fix is the notification flags... arghhh how difficult can that be since 4 months I don 't get a flag if someone replies to me... kinda basic...
Did you take a look at other frontends? Notification is not a Blockchain function. Maybe you find e.g. Busy.org more like your style.
I think you hit the nail on the head.
As long as people can vote themselves an ROI, they will. I see so many not only upvote their own articles, which makes some sense, but every comment they make. What is funny is when someone comments on the article with something positive, doesnt vote the article, but upvotes his comment. I had that happen to me today.
I think you are onto something with the Influence.
Although at the end of the day, most people will act in their own self interest.
your idea is excellent - like most great ideas , it will not matter to those that are draining the money out of this place, and they are in control.
Ha! Steem may be run by those who are here for a selfish ROI..... but i am not sure yet. There is such spirit in this community. We made this post to determine whether the founders of steem truly want a thriving community.
If those in control of this sytem do not want to make it fair.... we will fork the steem blockchain and create a competitive network that fairly distributes wealth.
if you have the skills to do that - you should do it - anyone could run a fairer system than the one they use here , and if you do open a new platform ontop of steem - please invite me - i am now following you earthnation and want to see more from you -David
Давно пора..)
I've seen many posts been done over the coal for upvoting their own posts, especially those that hold large accounts, some say it comes down to integrity as it's like stealing, I don't see how it is, maybe that's a light to shine on more.
Why can't you upvote yourself, shouldn't you like what you put out, isn't it like backing yourself saying your confident in the work you put out, but maybe it should be set at a few penny's for everyone across the board to make it fair.
We are apart of @the-curator were we help find undervalued posts, there are many curators that spend many hours finding posts for people to be able to find new content.
yes, we are also helping undervalued posts by free resteem service.
@earthnation the challenges you state are clearly should be in developers backlog.
I'm analyst who make his living by solving this kind of problem. I have mathematics and economics education and actually some experience in the field of content and user scorìng. Hope we could work together under some solutions here.
Right now, and upvote and resteem. Will definitely try to dig deeper here.
This post has received a 1.73 % upvote from @boomerang thanks to: @earthnation
@boomerang distributes 100% of the SBD and up to 80% of the Curation Rewards to STEEM POWER Delegators. If you want to bid for votes or want to delegate SP please read the @boomerang whitepaper.
This post has received a 1.0 % promotion upvote from @boomerang thanks to: @boomerang-test
@boomerang distributes 100% of the SBD and up to 80% of the Curation Rewards to STEEM POWER Delegators. If you want to bid for votes or want to delegate SP please read the @boomerang whitepaper.
One solution I have thought of to make Steemit more fair is to have a timer set to when you can selfvote according to your steempower. Giving minnows the ability to do it right away, dolphins at the very end of the article time and not allowing whales to self vote. Or some sort of variation and graduated step based on steempower to force whales to not vote on their own accounts.
Steem as a whole needs more ways for people to spend and trade it for real goods. And then whales need to actually start spending some of their steem to actually get a economy going.
I like this idea yes! However.... what would stop a whale from making a second account and up voting that secondary account constantly? Something to think about....
Yeah, this would be extremely difficult to stop, since anyone can make as many unrelated accounts as they want to.
No matter what we do there will always be ways to game the system. The important thing to do is to set expectations and try to give new accounts a bit of an advantage that well-established accounts don't.
You could try to police the system and sieze accounts that are shown to be sock-pupets that only vote for whales or demand a certain distribution of voting from whales.
If whales can't vote for themselves until the very end then it give a bit more of a boost to everyone voting for them. They still get the author awards.
What the whales need to do is to encourage the STEEM economy by getting actual goods and sevices exchanged in STEEM that way they wont have to Steem down and buy another currency to get real value for their post.
I think you are also doing the same thing with different way .
That is an awesome idea!!
I also had a few discussions with a friend of mine, regarding the matter of the voting power and the fact that is kept between few people. A new user has a hard time to make himself noticed, even if he writes good quality material.
Thank you for putting the effort into making this post!
Yeah, new users getting noticed is pretty difficult here. However, new people getting noticed is pretty difficult anywhere, not just here, so it is really interesting to see if Steemit is able to make it friendly for beginners.
This mechanism would bring so much more cash down to the minnows! I think this is the key!
Aren't the minnows and the whale the same people who are working for the platform?
This is pretty interesting. I see the points you are making and also think that a system that benefits discovery of new authors could be very healthy for Steem in the long-term. It will be exciting to see how this will be solved, and I personally don't really have any ideas to contribute with at this moment. Anyway, great post; I think it's an important topic that you are addressing!
Thank you for your support @valth!
Or they could make it so upvotes torward the same person or yourself become less effective over time.
its an interesting idea, however i think it will lead to the majority of people just finding a random article and upvoting it random with no eye for content. the problem is there isnt a mirror for quality.
We could impose a penalty for upvoting unpopular content.
Also.... even if people were just upvoting a random article.... this mechanism would still trickle down quite a bit of power from the whales to the new users.
My suggestion would be to create a new equation linking influence to reward or make influence independent of reward. I will explain in further details later on in my next blog post! Be on the look out for it!
I don't know what the solution is, but I definitely see the problem here. Though I question the efficacy of your solution.
Basically, I don't think that the solution can be a metric that can be so easily manipulated like that. As mentioned by someone else, a person could easily just upvote random content whenever they want. As well, it seems that it would negatively impact more casual users who aren't savvy with all the metrics, but are heavily involved in their network of people.
Basically, your idea puts on a little number that would harm many casual users while only creating a small hoop to jump through for some of the biggest contributors to this problem. That is, it wouldn't meaningfully effect their impact.
Perhaps tweaking your idea a bit so that rather than penalizing people for not interacting with more folks it rewards the folks that do.
Though personally, I can't think of any form of incentivization that wouldn't just cause people to adopt new steps in their output algorithms.
In fact, it seems to me that the more incentivization systems and complex algorithms we put in, the more we'll be alienating the mainstream rather than taking them in.
For people like me, who aren't super knowledgeable about tech stuff or blockchains or social media--the abundance of algorithms and whatnot can be a bit overwhelming.
Rather than adding on something new, perhaps there's a way to simplify something that already exists in a way that addresses this problem.
I don't know what that is, since I'm still learning the program. Maybe it's impossible. But that's my two cents.
I love your explanation and enthusiasm, keep it up👍 Success is not attain on silver platter. Greatness entails perseverance and endurance. Never get tired ~God bless you.
finding solutions is a noble deed, let alone a solution that gives positive energy to the wider community, this solution is very good for all of us, giving way out of the problem, thanks for the findings.
This post has received a 2.61 % upvote from @drotto thanks to: @earthnation.
This Post Has Been Quality Verified By @steemthat Promotion Services. This post has received a 50.00 % upvote from @steemthat Return the favor and SteemThat Person Back: @earthnation.
This post has received a 2.19 % upvote from @buildawhale thanks to: @earthnation. Send at least 0.50 SBD to @buildawhale with a post link in the memo field for a portion of the next vote.
To support our daily curation initiative, please vote on my owner, @themarkymark, as a Steem Witness
This post has received a 2.05 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @earthnation.
This wonderful post has received a bellyrub 6.59 % upvote from @bellyrub thanks to this cool cat: @earthnation. My pops @zeartul is one of your top steemit witness, if you like my bellyrubs please go vote for him, if you love what he is doing vote for this comment as well.
This post has received a 2.90 % upvote from
thanks to: @earthnation.
For more information, click here!!!!
The Minnowhelper team is still looking for investors (Minimum 10 SP), if you are interested in this, read the conditions of how to invest click here!!!
nice one !!!
great post really like it......
keep it up!!
Congratulations @earthnation! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPCongratulations @earthnation!
Your post was mentioned in the hit parade in the following category:
Upvoting yourself is not very profitable so I think that will be solved by itself when people realise that. My personal opinion is that Steemit need time, everything will be put in the right place, we just need to continue with contribution, just like you did with this post. Steem is excelent platform and it can only go up, but like everything else that worth, it need time.
It's seen all of us that steem future is so bright.
This post received a 25% upvote from @morwhale team thanks to @earthnation! For more information, click here! , TeamMorocco! .
I think this is a good idea and a step in the right direction. The only potential problem is that the bot networks can just create new accounts to function as new interactions. But your solution is still better than the status quo. The comment spamming and upvote networks are wrecking this place, IMO.
Excellent, I invite you to review my profile so you can see my content and if I LIKE TO VOTE. GREETINGS
Very interesting! You have a fresh account so I'm gonna support you. There is an upvote for you and keep on doing you!
I know how hard it is to get big upvotes on a new account so you should try out @MinnowPowerUp where you can earn up to 30% more steem power than just powering up through steemit! It's a subscription based daily upvote bot that draws its power from a delegation pool. I also recently made this post explaining my experience with it in more depth while earning over $1 per day in upvotes.
I do not like your idea. I am new here still, just went to 91 days, 3 months. Why do people always want to take away from other people. I made it to a 53 rep, without using vote bots, or minnowboosters or any of the other available tools for people to raise their levels. You have only been here for 7 days and are at level 57, yes I see most of that is from your investing in the system. To take away from people that have worked to get where they are, no! Think of a different way, a method to reward people for helping new users instead of punishing them for not. I will NOT be forced to vote for a I vote for you you vote for me type comment. I will not be forced to VOTE for someone that stole a picture off the internet and posted it with no words and no info of who's or where it came from! If you want to help new people that join steemit to succeed then make the tools to help them, and incentives* higher rep people to help them not to PUNISH people because they made it on there own. Screw communism.
This post received a 4.2% upvote from @randowhale thanks to @earthnation! For more information, click here!
Everyones excited as the countdown has begun.. looking eagerly for very good outcomes...good wishes to you.. and everyone..
Your post was resteem by Whale ResteemService @booster007
Keep it up!
All the best!
First Follow for 3 hours | Send a transaction with post URL | Your post gets resteemed | A post can only be resteemed once!
Thanks for your good information
The easiest and to me most logical solution is to disable any payout via self-upvote
@originalworks