Around Some Bots In 80 seconds. Or Thereabouts.
I think I may have mentioned in a previous post that serendipity and I are like this.
The last time, I went looking for one thing and ended up with something else. This time, I wasn't looking for anything. It came looking for me.
This is me right now. By the end of this post, it may be you. You've been warned. :) I've been slowly working through replies and posts in my feed (at least it feels like I'm moving too slow), and I finally came to this post about the new Transparency Bot published in the mid-afternoon on Sunday. In essence, it was an introduction of a bot built to monitor posts and then comment on those posts where the author has paid $50 or more in USD to one or more vote bots. You know, nothing controversial at all. :) My first reaction when I read the post was, cool. Can't hurt to have a little transparency. It wasn't going to flag, it wasn't going to pass judgment on content, it was going to list the bots paid to boost the post, and the amount paid to each if more than one, making the conversion from SBD, presumably, to USD. So far, I've only looked at a few of the comments Transparency Bot has left on the boosted posts, but if those few are indicative of what's being paid out in USD, it's mind boggling. Regardless of which side you're on about the use of bid bots, you should check out the post. Transparency Bot just launched, so it had issues with how many posts it could comment on due to bandwidth, but it sounds like it's getting some delegation to help with that for now. It will be interesting, just based on the comments on Transparency Bot's announcement post, to see how long it will last. Bot users aren't happy about it, in part, because Transparency Bot is only going after the vote buyers, not the vote sellers. But since it's supposed to be commenting on the use, and the bid bots names are included in the comment, there appears to be as equal of treatment as you can give, since bid bots don't generally post. This is where the serendipity begins. When I went to see the comments by Transparency Bot thus far, my interest was piqued by this recent post calling out a very new spammer with the moniker fzek62442nd3. The post was by rondras, who was pointing out just how much fzek62442nd3 had paid to get his original post (the same post has gone through various edits, presumably waiting for a payout before posting another?), of Hello everyone on Steemit. Thank you, please give me follows here, so it could appear on the trending page. Now, in my mind, as far as spam goes, this is pretty innocuous. If someone wants to spend an insane amount to post something most spammers say in hundreds of comments a day, whatever. Anyone here upvoting that, though, has some serious issues. The spammer has been fighting back, changing the post to say other things, including how they had paid for their votes to get more visibility, votes, rewards, etc., just like everyone else on the trending page. They have also been calling out bot owners for one reason or another, including receiving payments for votes that were never given, yet payment was not reimbursed. However, that's not the most interesting part about fzek62442nd3. You should follow the link above to read the whole post, but in a nutshell, rondras found it curious, and I do, too, that this "new" spammer used anonsteem to open up the account, and transferred a decent-sized some of SBDs straight from Bitrrex in order to pay for the bots. You'll want to read rondras' conclusions, I'm sure, but let me finish first. The plot thickens, I assure you. Remember, this started out with Transparency Bot, who in turn commented on rondras' post about a spammer paying a bunch of money to get their post on trending. Now, Transparency Bot commented on rondras' post because, of course, rondras paid bots to boost his post in excess of $50 USD. So, the post about the spammer who happened to pay for bots (the least of the story, I think) also paid for bots. In comparison, rondras' post contained tons better content, and ultimately, I believe, it's a story that everyone should be aware of. In other words, a more acceptable use of bots, if there is such a thing. Yet Transparency Bot isn't discriminating, which at first blush is good, I think. However, that's not all. I decided to go check rondras' wallet. When people are using bidbots and such, I'm curious to see what effect it might have on their SP. I found a smallish minnow, a little over 500 SP who was delegating most of it to someone else. Since I know delegation, even from smaller accounts is common, I decided I wanted to know to who or what rondras was delegating to. Turns out, the delegation goes to Nicestbot. Nicestbot is not a bid bot, though, so you can't buy votes. According to its second post, it works off an algorithm to determine vote worthy content. Or the bot and the algorithm work together (not sure what that's supposed to mean, since there's obviously a human behind the bot writing the post). In a week's span, it reported upvoting over 1,500 posts made by around 1,000 users. Accordingly to help out minnows is its mission. Sounds like a worthy cause, right? Plenty of people around doing that. And since this bot doesn't take minnows' money, all the better. Well, maybe. I haven't checked all of the posts Nicestbot has upvoted so far (someone else can do that, if they're interested in seeing how an algorithm based curation bot is working), but it just so happens that Nicestbot upvoted fzek62442nd3's post. You know, the one that rondras, who delegates to Nicestbot, called out? It was only $0.01, so not nearly as much as the bid bots paid on it (the ones that actually did pay), but it still hit the post with something. I know, but I hope it was a tale worth telling. Frankly, I don't know if there's rhyme or reason to any of this, including this post. I just found it interesting that a new Transparency Bot post would lead me to a more-than-meets-the-eye post about a spammer that would then in turn take me to the actual spam post that then received an upvote from a bot delegated SP from the writer of the post about the spam post. Clear as mud, right? I'm afraid that's what I think about this whole bot deal. Clear as mud.
Image source
Yeah, Yeah. Move Along
Get To The Serendipity!
That's What You Call Serendipity?!
Screenshot taken from helloacm.com
Screenshot from fzek62442nd3's page on steemworld.org.Took You Long Enough
Steemit is increasingly becoming the decentralized blog service for bots.
Sad, but amazingly true. It will be such a waste if all there's left when it's all said and done are bots on the blockchain, after such promise and speed and capacity. It won't be proof of brain, it will be proof of ego, or proof of human nature instead. I hope a line can still be drawn and we can through our collective actions hold the line.
I think actions would need to be taken to disincentive delegating SP to bots.
Right now people with high SPs no longer have to curate content. They don't have to participate or contribute to the community anything other than their voting power. They simply delegate to bots for the payouts, and then content creators pay for the privilege to self-curate. Once a content creator has built up, or bought, enough SP, they can then join the virtuous cycle.
Its a complete breakdown to how things are 'supposed' to work.
I'm in agreement. We need to give high SP a reason to curate again. It needs to be better than what the bidbots or delegating can do. It needs to show an equal or better profit, or at least close enough to it, and if there is altruism involved in any of this, it needs to be something that will increase visibility and be best for the long term viability of this ecosystem. There may be other criteria, too, to make this work.
So, how do we get from where we are to there? What can we do, as a community, to incentivize all of that? Or can we?
Asking, pleading, begging or even shaming them to back off the bots and delegation and come back to curating hasn't worked. Those who are already inclined to commit to the community in some fashion, at their own loss, I might add, already are. So, there needs to be more of something involved, which I believe at least partially means some acceptable level of potential profit.
I wish I knew the answer. I'm open to suggestions. HFs always seem to have consequences, intended or not, and those seem to always lead to some other workaround.
Looking at it from another angle—If enough people stopped using bidbots, they would go away. So, then, how do we incentivize the bot users to stand down?
As you can see, I'm all questions and no answers. :)
Some ideas:
Just some thoughts... I may have to put these into a new Steemit-oriented post. :)
Okay, so first off, you've obviously given this a lot of thought. :) Second of all, you absolutely do need to turn this all into a formal post.
In looking at the links, it's also obvious you've been working on solutions for a long time. It must be totally frustrating to still be addressing things that you were bringing up at least nine months ago.
All of these ideas you suggest are great, as far as I'm concerned. They do all appear to be code related items, which means someone on the dev and exec side of things needs to be on board with it.
So, how does that happen, when so much other stuff is on their radar? Communities is supposed to help with the visibility issue (we'll see) but most of the rest of this isn't really on the radar. How does it get on the radar?
I keep hearing that the community has a say, but the community is too often fractured, throwing their full weight behind things that are the results of the real issues. What's it going to take for enough of us to get around even some of the ideas you list so that we're enough to affect change? How many of us do we need?
If you do end up making this a post, I'll be very interested to see what the response is. If it's anything like the discussion about bidbots currently going on, it will be hot, it will be heavy, but at least the dialogue will be started.
"Bot users aren't happy about it, in part, because Transparency Bot is only going after the vote buyers, not the vote sellers. "
Im personally not happy mostly because those robotic comments that are being left by this bot (and some others) are super long and they make comment section look like a mess.
Im trying to create quality content and Im engaging with many followers. And obviously Im using bots (1 day after I post article) to make sure that my curators are being rewarded so their upvotes would bring them some profit too.
And having all of sudden huge post coming from that bot is just ... so ugly. It's sometimes almost hard to see real people comments somewhere in between comments coming from those bots.
I do have to agree, the comment is large and loud, and could be toned down for sure.
This idea of giving curators more of an incentive to curate is a newer explanation that I hadn't heard until maybe a week or two ago, which I find interesting. I obviously can't claim to have seen every thought about using bots or why it would be worth it, though, so I'm glad to finally run across it because it does actually make the most sense, if there are humans actually curating.
The day wait is interesting, too. You must have a decent group of followers who regularly curate your content, so you can then add to their rewards?
Thank you for your kind reply. I very much appreciate your time.
I've noticed that you're very responsive person. I also just looked at your profile hoping that I may find some common interests but it seem that we dont share that many lol :)
"This idea of giving curators more of an incentive to curate is a newer explanation that I hadn't heard until maybe a week or two ago, which I find interesting."
Im a social media marketer (different industry and different platform) and I studied Steemit and psychology that is behind this platform and I realized that all my efforts of building solid followerbase can go to waste if I will lose those followers. Quite many people end up frustrated because it's so hard to build your reach and make any profit here.
So my goal is to help my followers and if I notice that someone is engaging a lot then Im auto-voting all his posts and on top of that Im trying to engage and comment his articles even more. I realized that people here spent so much energy trying to chease their dream of 10k followers base.
I rather like to have 1k followers but loyal and engaging.
I also noticed that many people are checking their curation rewards and if they see that rewards coming from upvoting my posts are higher then most likely they will auto-vote my posts as well.
Im using bots and I hardly ever break even. That's the fact. So do I make money? Not really. But it does help my curators and this is what we should care in a long run.
Let's face it. We're all here to take care of our own business in the first place. So if I would convince you that following me will bring you profits and that we have similar interests. Wouldnt you follow back?
Knowing that I will engage back, I will auto-vote your posts, I will be using bots 1 day after posting article to bring more value into curation pool rewards.
Sorry for such a long reply.
I wish those bots would be posting shorter comments.
Cheers,
Piotr
No worries with the long reply. I really don't mind them, since mine can be on the long side, too, :)
I think that it does take more than a few words to have a meaningful exchange of opinions and ideas.
I'm glad you're concerned about your curating followers, and I hope they do actually reciprocate. I also agree that the amount of loyal fans is more important than the total.
However, I also want followers who are discerning and discriminating in the type of content they consume. I don't want anything automatic. I want eyeballs on what I write. I want engagement. I'll take the upvotes, too, but ultimately, I'm not writing just to write and take my sliver of the reward pool. I'm here to build a following of readers who actually value what I write because they read it.
So, instead of automatically following back the followers, I engage with those who engage with me, and i upvote their comments. I also will go looking at their posts now and then and upvote those if I like what I see. But nothing is automatic with me. I know, I'm among the small minority here, but that's how I do it, and it's how I would like it to happen on my posts.
Ultimately, everyone is free to decide how they will do things here, which I'm okay with as long as that allows me to do it my way, too.
I understand the desire to make a profit here, but it's a long slow game for those of us who don't have cash to invest or weren't smart enough to work on the server or client side of the blockchain.
I wish you well. I hope you continue to find your way here. I don't know if you're interested, but there all kinds of leagues and communities and initiatives to get involved with if you haven't done so and are interested. Those folks tend to help one another as much as they can given their own circumstances. But they're doing it together, which helps make the slogging here a little more tolerable. :)
Didn't need to go to your profile to see we have in common those things that are more important than topics or subject matter. Saw it in your comment on Transparency Bot's intro. Saw it in this post and even moreso in this reply. Seems some of us are in it for reasons other than the money. I mean, we all probably want money, but it's obvious to me that it's not your primary reason for being here. Funny part is that while it is probably my primary reason for being in Steemit, I can't imagine taking the bot path many have alluded to. Even if I could afford to. Lol. Not to step on any toes. It just seems like trickery to me. Auto votes seems way contrary to the idea here. What if you have me on auto vote and I post something you absolutely don't agree with? I guess it doesn't matter to some. Sigh. Oh well. Really nice reading you. You're a great and educational writer. Glad I follow you in spite of a possible non-commonality or two. Hehe. Paz y mas.
Ah, so it was the transparency bot rant comment. :) I think I actually threw the kitchen sink at that one, too.
Okay, well, then you've basically been hit with my thoughts on bots. And the complicated but intricate webs they weave between themselves and actual human users.
I do have to say, though, not using bots is the harder path. It's tough when you watch others inflating their rewards. I'm not going to equate it to anything like a capital crime or some major morality faux pas because it's not. It's a means to an end. Unfortunately, despite all of the arguments, old and new, I'm not yet convinced they even need to exist let alone of their absolute importance.
Auto voting is another thing. Good spotting that. I understand why people do it. I appreciate the confidence in me or whoever, but I do want to be read, too.
I came here for the money. I stay because of the cause. Not so much to join others in it, but to carve out my own little space, and hold to whatever principles I'm holding to. And for me, that means posting, commenting and curating. Then repeat. :)
hi
"I'm glad you're concerned about your curating followers, and I hope they do actually reciprocate. I also agree that the amount of loyal fans is more important than the total."
We're on the same page. Excellent :)
"I hope you continue to find your way here. I don't know if you're interested, but there all kinds of leagues and communities and initiatives to get involved with if you haven't done so and are interested. Those folks tend to help one another as much as they can given their own circumstances. But they're doing it together, which helps make the slogging here a little more tolerable. :)"
I didnt know about it. Could you please tell me more?
Thank you for your time
The communities here generally revolve around what you like, so I would suggest hanging out in a tag of your choosing to see what you can find there. As far as leagues and initiatives, I'm not the best person to ask about specific ones, but @davemccoy does quite a bit around newbie contests and games, and @abh12345 has a curation and engagement leagues he runs. There are offshoots of those, as well. If you had something you might be interested in, either one of them might be better suited to direct you to it. There's folks all over the place, really. It just depends on interest and what you need/want to feel more involved and at home here. :)
Thanks for introducing me to those two accounts.
I also noticed that you're interested with @Haejin case? Good read :)
Dilly Dilly @glenalbrethsen
Long Live the King!
This post is quite funny when you think about it. haha
It would be hysterical if it weren't so tragic, and I'm afraid so indicative of what actually goes on around here. If we could actually peer straight onto the blockchain and interpret the goings on in terms of how users, human and bots alike, interact and relate to one another, I think it would be the most frightening experience ever.
It's like the Matrix, except there's humans behind the machines (bots) munching (metaphorically) on the humans.
Sounds like you went down a rabbit hole there and maybe ended up right back where you started?
The transparency bot idea sounds like an interesting (controversial) one. I'll be very interested to see how it goes so thanks for the tip! :)
Yeah, I did, a very winding and circular rabbit hole at that. As I said, though, I wasn't off looking for trouble this time, it found me, and I don't like being tracked down when I'm basically minding my own business.
Although, not having to go digging around as much as I have for things was very convenient. :) If I'm going to do it, it should be easy, right?
Transparency bot is a very interesting idea, and I do like its set up. I like the idea of knowing just how much of the rewards is bot money better, but it's converting SBD to USD instead, I guess, which I would imagine has to be much easier than going from SBD back to reward pool money.
Nice Post dear. Looking forward to read your next post.
I have followed you, follow me back to be getting up votes from me on your future posts. https://steemit.com/@nwanne
Thank you.
Self promotion could make your reputation a whale snack!
Your Reputation Could be a Tasty Snack with the Wrong Comment!
Thank You!
I certainly appreciate the follow and the comment. However, it is more common here on Steemit to comment about the post itself and not include something about self-promotion. I say this as a service to you, since you're still new, that plenty of people will not like you doing this on their posts. Some may even flag you.
I would suggest taking some time to comment about what the post says, something you agree with, don't agree with, like, don't like, etc., instead of using it as more or less a means to ask for followers. I don't follow everyone who follows me, nor does everyone who I follow, follow me.
Welcome to Steemit, and good luck with your endeavors here.