You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: @msgivings, frequent trending author, has been EXPOSED for plagiarism. The question remains: Is this what Steemit wants to be?

in #steemit8 years ago (edited)

But it shouldn't get thousand of rewards.

"Subjective proof-of-work" is... subjective. That is at the core of Steemit protocole and value. Deal with it. The protocole never specify what type of content should or should not receive high payouts. We all know the rules from the start and what it means.

"Maybe" the mistake of Dan & Ned was to not find a way to select their happyfew whales based on their interests to please a specific niche of users... or maybe not.

Now, I personally have no problem with excessive rewards per se, or even gossip/girly content earning lots of rewards. How much people earn and with what type of content is not my business. If they found their audience good for them. If whales want to upvote them good for them. Their choice, not mine, not yours.

If one is not happy with that, well there is a simple solution (that will please everyone, and will please steem traders particularly): Buy steems, power up, and be a whale. Period. Invest money in Steemit and shape the quality of the content.

That being said, what annoyed me is not the crappy content, it is that a scammer wins. Nothing more. (He/She could have scam with high quality content, it doesn't change anything to the equation, content quality is not relevant here) And I suspect that there is a whale behind that.

That is so simple to game for a whale. Think about it: create fake account, upvote it, boom, the fake account earn few hundreds, which falls into the radar of other people and other whales. Rinse an repeat. With this process a 'dark' whale doesn't even need to cash out, just create fake account nurture it (and get the SBD). Then people who look after their curation reward will do the rest.

Sort: