@Themarkymark run @buildawhale that profits from selling votes using (@blocktrades rented SP) on total garbage posts in the last hours before payout.

themarkymark (81) 7 years ago

First off, you are the last person to open your mouth about reward pool abuse.

Second, no amount of Steem power is available that can police the amount of garbage being created on a daily basis here. You choose to use your stake to upvote your "SBD Correction" comments 10 times a day for $200 or flag people to push your agenda which is hypocritical to your actions. I spend a lot of time working with Steem Cleaners trying to stop the garbage at the source and promote users who do produce good content (something you chose to flag in the past).

I don't have the resources or manpower to control everything submitted, blacklist one account another is created posting the same garbage. I moved our max age to 5 days a while ago, it's not your call what we use for our max age.

As I said before I agree with the idea of reducing the max age (and I did reduce it by 25%) you flagged that comment to $0 and then upvoted your comment for $150. This is after you flagged my entire curation team's week worth of a work to zero for who knows the reason, I can only assume it is because @blocktrades flagged you as you flagged two writers that he frequently votes on.

You are a terrorist, there is no amount of logic or reason that works for your kind. I reduced our max age as I believe in the idea and it was something I've been meaning to do since it was discussed in hangout session with other bot owners. I am one of the few that even reduced it and it is harder for me as I didn't run auto refund software linked to the bid tracker. I couldn't change it easily due to technical reasons. It took almost a week of manual refunds to handle a change from 1 SBD to 2 SBD minimum bid due to rounding errors causing the vote windows to take twice as long.

You are going to do two things, rape the reward pool with your nonsense comments or flag innocent people. Changing our max age isn't going to do a damn thing to change that.

I chose to ignore you because it is like dealing with a toddler with an AK-47. You want to act like a childish dick, I can't stop you, you want to act like a civilized human being, we can talk.

$6.81

18 votes

michaeldavid (67) 7 years ago

Behind you 100% bro. This shit needs to stop!

$0.44

3 votes

grumpycat (70) 7 years ago (edited)

Good luck fixing the self-voting problem!Yeah, so basically you suck at changing a "5" to a "3.5" (which took, out of all people, @jerrybanfield a few minutes to do) and you want to become a Witness.

As I said before I agree with the idea of reducing the max age (and I did reduce it by 25%) you flagged that comment to $0 ...

Where is that comment?

Either your irresponsible vote selling business improves or I bring it down the efficient way by taking down Steem along with it.

As you may or not be aware of it, in 10 days the next step is to widen the scope from vote sellers to the SP powering them. @blocktrades and @freedom.

Keep ignoring the terrorists and go back to sleep, everything will be fine.

$0.00

4 votes

grumpycat (70) 7 years ago

Thanks @Blocktrades for acknowledging reception.

$158.33

5 votes

themarkymark (81) 7 years ago

I changed it to five as that was the agreed upon number when bid bot owners discussed it in the past in our meeting.

The problem isn't irresponsible vote selling, it is widespread spam and abuse and no efficient means to stop them. I know because I spend a good amount of time on this daily, and it is endless and unrewarding.

You want to have an adult discussion, come join us on Discord.

Just flagging innocent people to do as much damage as you can while rewarding yourself $10,000 USD a day does nothing to help your cause.

$0.00

travelersmemoire (58) 7 years ago

Honestly all bots and vote groups are a problem and lead to spam. We need less centralized power not more. That said we’re all guilty. I myself have used bots to try and gain traction/viewership...

$0.00

themarkymark (81) 7 years ago

I can't keep up with your edits, but the comment is here

$0.00

grumpycat (70) 7 years ago (edited)

Didn't flag your comment to zero at all.

Sorry if I missed your small unintelligible "planning on locking it off for 5 days" in this giant rant about my self-voting.

Also removed my flag on your "community service" when I saw you message. It looked like just bot announcement posts.

BTW, At the price I paid for my STEEM, You'll have a hard time making me feel bad for self-voting in that giant shitshow that is Steem right now.

$177.90

maneki-neko (67) 7 years ago

I will stand by my former comments that I think @grumpycat is taking a good first step to reduce botting on the site, as I have just posted elsewhere Bots are FORBIDDEN under the terms of service, something everyone conveniently likes to overlook. Self upvoting is NOT forbidden, obviously.

From the Terms of Service:
{ 17. User Conducthttps://steemit.com/tos.html

17.1. When accessing or using the Services, you agree that you will not commit any unlawful act, and that you are solely responsible for your conduct while using our Services. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, you agree that you will not:
..........
17.1.3. Use any robot, spider, crawler, scraper or other automated means or interface not provided by us to access our Services or to extract data; }

When you are buying the use of an upvoting service, you are [USING] a [ROBOT] to [ACCESS] the [SERVICES].

$0.18

5 votes

lexiconical (72) 7 years ago

Wrong. I'll let imlikett edumucate (sic) you.

$6.06

imlikett (56) 7 years ago

This is false, and misunderstood. You are not using a bot, you are simply telling a bot to go to your post and upvote. The bot is an account made just like anyone else. It's the same as giving your friend who has a steemit account money, to upvote you.
You are not using it to access anything. Again, you are accessing steem through your own account. Not accessing it through a bot.
You are also not extracting data in anyway.
The bots are based on the steemit account and blockchain, which is provided by steemit.

$0.25

maneki-neko (67) 7 years ago

You are hiring the services of a bot. This is, effectively, using a bot. It is NOT the same as paying a friend, because it is a bot. The bot is accessing the Services of the steem blockchain by automatically upvoting. Upvoting is a Service provided. The automated means of automatically upvoting for money has NOT been provided by steemit.com.

Plain and simple: you are using an automated means, not provided by steemit.com, to game the system and drain the reward pool when you are using a upvote bot.

Or, maybe you think that paying $2500 to promote a crappy article and game $5000 is what steem was designed for?

Bot services are the opposite of the 'proof-of brains' concept, which is supposed to be the core of this whole thing... so where exactly does paying for automated promotion fit into this equation?

$0.00

roccofalcone (-3)(1) 7 years ago

$0.33

Reveal Comment

syncubate (50) 7 years ago

If you have an issue with votes happening up to day seven after a post is published, why not take it up with Steemit Inc and the Witnesses? You are not addressing the root cause of this problem by self-policing the platform.

The root cause is the platform itself. Some of the rules by which it is operating clearly represent fatal flaws to the long term viability of the steem blockchain, as users such as yourself are pointing out. The rules thus need to be changed and applied equitably to all users.

And who makes the rules? Not the users. It's Steemit Inc. You cannot possibly expect to meaningfully address this issue unless it's tackled from the top down.

Voting services and users that use them are not the issue. They're just playing the game that has been fostered by the very framework of Steemit. It's the deficiencies of that framework which you should be rebuking.

$0.00

bitfiend (60) 7 years ago (edited)

From what I've seen, most of the witnesses and people that can do something about this are completely ignoring the problem. I've been doing some reading myself and it seems that some of the biggest whales have already given up on this platform

Is Steemit in a state of implosion? Isn't @dan one of the big guys around here?

A response to Dan Larimer left STEEMIT because it was unfixable

This is all starting to look worse and worse by the minute, but then I see @grumpycat trying to do something about it.

As a newcomer, I am pretty disgusted with the botting that goes on in this platform. It makes me think that if I don't invest 20 SBD in an upvoting service just so that I can get 25 SBD in return in upvotes I will never make it on this platform.

These upvote bot services don't create or add any value to steemit. In my opinion, it creates an illusion of value. False value. It's not real value because the creator tricked you by giving himself a large upvote. It is deceitful, in my opinion, when it comes to any business.

He will take down the whole platform if he has to, and I don't necessarily disagree with him. These bots are creating false value in every post they upvote. I thought there was more manual curation going on, but clearly there isn't

$0.10

4 votes

lexiconical (72) 7 years ago

Lol, he's doing something alright. Self-voting $10,000s a day on pure spam sock puppets:

Abuse 3.png

syncubate (50) 7 years ago

Thanks for pointing me to Dan's post. That is a bold statement from him. First time that I ever saw it. I suppose he has come to the realization that the market system is not being applied within Steemit. After all, what we're seeing with rampant voting abuse by whales and their associates is antithetical to the definition of how an efficient market is supposed to operate, as noted in the Steem White Paper itself: "The market system rewards those who provide value to others and punishes those who consume more value than they produce." The latter is far more prevalent on Steemit than the former is, that's for sure.

$0.00

whatsup (76) 7 years ago

There is no need for grumpycat to act like this. He could have just talked to the bot owners or handled it in 100 different way. Not all is as it seems. sometimes people profit by being false heros.

$0.00

roccofalcone (-3)(1) 7 years ago (edited)

$0.33

Reveal Comment

themarkymark (81) 7 years ago

Didn't flag your comment to zero at all.

You flagged it from $12 to 0.22 (at the time of your flag), at that point I thought there was some reasoning with you as you didn't nuke it to sub $0. Then you upvote your comment "Fixed" to $140 (one of the flags still took $40 of our curation posts, I suspect it was too old at the time you got to it, not sure) I decided you are going to do what you want to do.

Sorry if I missed your small unintelligible "planning on locking it off for 5 days" in this giant rant about my self-voting.

I was the first and one of the few (only one other responded) to respond to your initial post. I got upvotes from many of the bot owners which you then downvoted.

Also removed my flag on your "community service" when I saw you message (fixed). (Looked like just bot announcement posts).

I appreciated that, and so did my curators, it's hard enough time supporting curation without whales backing. We spend a crap ton of time digging through garbage to find good posts to promote.

BTW, At the price I paid for my Steem, You'll have a hard time making me feel bad for self-voting in that giant shitshow that Steem is right now.

That I have nothing to say to, I posted earlier I am very conflicted about self-voting. While I am starting to come to the terms of "it's your stake to use as you want" I still have the clause of "within reason when it doesn't dramatically affect the community". Upvoting pointless comments to the maximum financial efficiency then demanding everyone to follow your new rule while flagging innocents does not make you look like a reward pool savior you claim to be.

I'm all for stopping the garbage on Steem, I spend a lot of time trying with no success. 3.5 days max age as compared to 5 days isn't going to magically clean up Steem, especially when no one wants to do it.

$0.00

hardikv (66) 7 years ago

Flagging of innocents is the main problem here. It's like: the government is not listening so I will kill innocent bystanders who are using the government's services for the government to take notice. Isn't that terrorism?
What have those innocent people done except use services to help themselves live better lives? And not on 6 days old posts, but post not older than a few hours! Why would you downvote them?
I am scared to use any bots as of now coz I can't afford a downvote. The SBD I earn pay my rent, they buy groceries, they help me pay for my 4 year old's daycare fees so that the mother and I can earn enough to provide him with a good sustainable life!
Downvoting honest, good and Innocent posts to make your point is not the way to go about it.
Like someone said here, tackle the root of the problem, please. Have a dialogue with Steemit Inc, with all bot owners and come to a common agreeable solution.
A humble request 🙏🏼✨

$0.32

6 votes

iwanttruth (43) 7 years ago

#nailedit

$0.00

brice-koeniguer (25) 7 years ago

Still, you're the grumpiest.

$0.00

jonsnow1983 (75) 7 years ago (edited)

My Post is in this list, it's in Spanish (My native Language), it's good quality and original, and I use the bot 1 day after I posted it so it can not reach the trending page cause of the bot, if I did something wrong I'd like to know what! And why did you put my post on that list? Like if all of my post are full of S$%$·% or something! I'm helping communities the best I can mostly in my hell of a country where people are bloody eating food from the trash! Please with all due respect move my post from that list. Do your homework next time bro because my blog is not the best around but is not full of crap either, check how many times I have upvoted for myself and see what I do before getting into conclusions. Best Regards!

$0.49

haphazard-hstead (66) 7 years ago

The way I understand that list, the list isn't saying anything about the quality of your post. It's showing that you paid slightly more for the bot's upvote ($21.47) than the value you gained from that upvote ($21.37). So the person running the bot is getting a lot of SBD from people, but not necessarily giving a good value to you in return.

$0.07

jonsnow1983 (75) 7 years ago

Thank you bro! I acted out of impulse and actually felt offended cause you know , there are many of us who really care about the site and growing communities!

$0.54

lexiconical (72) 7 years ago

You have nothing to apologize for. Everything you said was spot on, and Grumpy is a known bad actor:

Abuse 3.png

$5.83