I really wish it was only 10% of the time they were getting rewarded last time I read about it, it was much higher. While the post Analyzing 'spam' is now a 2 months old it does go into some detail about rewards.
While I understand your desire to kill off spam this is killing off engagement for the little guy when it comes to comments. If someone writes me a decent comment it would be pointless to reward them under this new system. Most that I know consider upvoting comments with 10-20% vote at most. While you might not think it’s a large threshold it is for new users. This also makes curtailing my own comment sections to do my best to have great stuff at the top also pointless as I’m just tossing voting power out of the window than. As a result spam would be first comment on far more blogs forcing people to downvote instead of rewarding the good stuff if you are a little guy.
What’s the different between YouTube and Steemit? Our comment sections are not as toxic and we also don’t give the little guy the middle finger with “sorry you don’t meet the minimum thresholds to be paid here.”
This is not addressing the larger issue and that is the UTTER FAILURE TO NOT LET THEM IN. Sorry but the network is not protecting itself in any way or shape. People have pointed out number of times spammers just create username1-1000’s and all they do is change the number at the end. That is pathetic they could evade whatever “protection” the network has. Such proof can be found in post like Steemit creates accounts for scammers?
I consider my comments to be ok. According to steem.supply comments are 24.4% of my projected weekly earning at a whopping $6 worth (I’ve had a good week so far and comments are not 50% or greater of my rewards.) Maybe 1/6 of that under your new system would be reward now. I don’t go around spamming the platform with “nice post,” I don’ think people should be forced to buy comments upvotes just to get them reward because they lack the means to do so with their own voting power.
There got to be a better way to reject spam by the network than to just punish everyone because of a couple of bad apples. It would not shock me if just a handful of people are running these spam bots.
I can think of a lot of places like that try and reward engagement by tossing out upvotes that are far under your proposed thresholds. You are not just killing off spam with something like this it would be hurting places trying to foster and have conversion. @abh12345 @denmarkguy @hanshotfirst
For me it depends which Spam is the focus - is it down to Blockchain bloat or rewards?
All these dust accounts use space, but earn nothing compared to the alt-spam accounts being used by larger accounts just to reward themselves a little less obviously.
I'm for knocking a bit off payouts, perhaps even to the negative as @miniature-tiger suggests - that would help reduce space usage perhaps, but not the also sizable issue of larger accounts doing the old 1 sock 2 sock 3 sockpuppet routine.