Warning to vote buyer/sellers! - Introducing GrumpyCompliance, mandatory in 14 days. (No more post-promotion allowed past 3.5 days)

25 days ago
64 in steem

Vote selling services have 14 days to stop accepting and refund requests for votes purchases on posts older than 3.5 days (84 hours) otherwise @GrumpyCat will begin randomly flagging the best posts that receive significant up-votes from the following accounts:

@Upme
@Appreciator
@Postpromoter
@Rocky1
@Jerrybanfield
Powered by @Freedom

@Buildawhale
@Pushup
@Allaz
@Levitation
@Aksdwi
Powered by @Blocktrades

@Upmyvote
@Randowhale (Thanks to @Berniesanders)
Powered by @Engagement

After 30 days this new "responsible vote selling" policy should be enforced directly by delegators @Blocktrades @Freedom and @Engagement.
Otherwise any posts up-voted using their delegation is at risk of being flagged for maximum effect.

Vote selling services that become fully compliant before the deadline are encouraged to proudly showcase their GrupyCompliant badge on their posts to reassure their customers.



Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  trending
69
  ·  24 days ago

There is no responsible way to sell votes on a platform where the selling of votes hurts the opportunity for content to get rewarded fairly. With whales selling their voting power, there is far less reason for any to vote on a great post simply because it is great.

What are curation rewards for again?

Oh yes. So until vote-buying is no longer a part of Steemit, neither should curation rewards be. These cunts are literally receiving rewards, which were put in place to encourage fair voting, for SELLING VOTING POWER.

If all of you just stopped fucking buying votes, within a week the whales would have two choices. Start voting fairly again to get their curation rewards, or watch as everyone else's voting power increases significantly because they haven't been voting.

That aside; even if what you proposed was in any way "responsible," why would you expect anyone to listen to you?

Can you explain what the fuck this is about?

Your upvotes on this post, and in the comments, would suggest to me that you're as much of a greedy abuser of the system as the villains you are trying to paint for us.

But I suppose I am once again wasting my time here. Because you will still be worshiped by the idiots you are impoverishing, because you have a good upvote.. and who gives a fuck about dignity when you can get a decent upvote, right?

·
29
  ·  23 days ago

You are completely right. I think they should be banned, i´m new in Steemit, but I think than the selling of votes fuck this up totally, the staff should evaluate the posts and users, then ban anyone who tries to sell or buy votes...

·
·
36
  ·  23 days ago

so you want a small group of people to have the exclusive right to decide whats right and whats wrong, whats valuable and what is worthless?i think the control you are shouting for goes against the very idea of freedom!

·
·
·
50
  ·  16 days ago

that is not what i read? I think it means that votes come from readers and not bots doing it for you. And that would be fantastic only people do not read, or read to little. And upvoting you an do like 10 times a day until your power is finished. I am guilty I did pay to get post upvoted, and I also abused the system for voting my self up, like many. We do not know how long steem will work so it is the case to make it worth in a short time therefor the resteem and upvotes are handy, wished it was different.

·
·
·
·
36
  ·  14 days ago

the staff should evaluate the posts and users, then ban anyone who tries to sell or buy votes...

thats what it says

as to the votes to to come from users i agree
i think voting bots should be banned but im new to steemit so there might be aspects i dont fully get yet.

·
·
·
·
41
  ·  10 days ago

Self upvote is another one. That should not even be possible. It's vain on normal platforms. But here is't a Problem.

If you are dolphin and above you can just make money by up-voting your own posts.

It takes away from any other curators if your posting is not totally worthless to begin with. And it takes away from everybody as there is only that many steem dollar generated each day.

Self upvote should be banned.

·
·
·
·
·
46
  ·  8 days ago

What's wrong with making a little extra money?

·
·
·
41
  ·  10 days ago

Quite the opposite: We want more people to decide whats valuable and what is worthless. And we want that decision to be done on merit of the article.

And if you want to promote: There is a fat promote button underneath your postings.

·
·
32
  ·  18 days ago

I'm new to steemit as wel I tought you get votes when you write interesting things or share your story blog or whatever. (would not be bad tough actually having steem to get some savings going)

·
·
·
41
  ·  10 days ago

That's the idea. However there seem to be a few flaws in the system. Namely: self upvotes and selling votes. Both distort and undermine the fundamentally merit based system.

·
·
41
  ·  10 days ago

Indeed. When I first heard of vote selling I immediately became suspicious. There is something fishy, if not outright evil going on. And selling (and buying) votes is certainly at the heart of it.

·
47
  ·  24 days ago

Selling votes seems pretty cut and dry damaging to the platform, but its literally the only way for the majority of users to make any sort of progress. The unfortunate truth is, it is entirely up to the whales to determine how this whole thing is going to work. They are the ones who have the influence to incentivize behavior in any meaningful way. To ask people not to buy upvotes is never going to work. Why? Because you're asking them to make a sacrifice for the greater good of something that they aren't invested in. I'm not saying it's right, but why would someone with .5 STEEM care at all about the value of STEEM? It is leagues more beneficial for them to abuse the system to gain some traction than self-sacrifice to do the right thing when everyone else is benefitting from doing the wrong thing. It's an issue of incentives. The people who set the incentives are incentivized to set the incentives in such a way that it bleeds the platform dry.

·
·
69
  ·  24 days ago

Selling votes seems pretty cut and dry damaging to the platform, but its literally the only way for the majority of users to make any sort of progress.

I would need you to define what you mean by progress in this context. If you mean SP, then one could simply convert their SBD's into SP, or sell it on the market and then buy STEEM to power up with. If you mean reputation score, then I would ask you; if all that reputation score means is how many times someone has paid to have their own work upvoted, does it really seem important enough to be measuring your progress on Steemit against?

I can empathize with your position. I truly can. But there are other ways of measuring progress, and other ways of acquiring it. There is the option to the "play the game," as I like to call it. You can go and read the work of others in your "niche" and leave insightful comments. Make "friends" and then you can all support one another as your accounts grow together. You can head over to discord and make yourself known in the chatrooms and give people a reason to end up on your blog upvoting your posts. This will certainly help one progress on Steemit, supposing they are not so unlikeable that it backfires.

Another possibility is to sweat for it. I have noticed it is getting more difficult for newcomers, and the vote-selling is largely responsible for that. But, if you can put in a graft and get out several quality posts a day, and retain that motivation to push on even during times when you're not getting what you feel you deserve, it will pay off in the end. I have seen the prolific ones succeed on here, just as I have witnessed this elsewhere.

Those options are there are right now, but I can assure you that if you all continue to buy votes, they will not be for much longer.

To ask people not to buy upvotes is never going to work.

I agree. I would like to believe that if they understood that their purchasing of votes was reversing the distribution of STEEM on the network and recentralizing the power in the hands of a few(who are obviously smart enough to know that they're doing this to you all and therefore unworthy of such power) that they would simply desist with the vote-buying. Unfortunately, however, I am no longer naive enough to believe this. I think the only chance there is to reverse the damage this is doing is to convince the sellers to close up shop. There is far less of them than there is buyers to convince. But, for all my ideas, I've none on how to convince a greedy bastard to let go of a cash cow.

I had just considered while finishing up that sentence that the possibility of a whale account, which was comprised of delegations from many, many dolphins and minnows, which sold votes, and which reinvested its liquidity and curation rewards into further helping to distribute STEEM across the network, could potentially work.

But.. no. This here is exactly the problem. We can't even be thinking of this as acceptable. Since when are rewards--the word the Steemit developers chose to use, something that you can purchase? I still think Steemit has a chance, but we need to realise we are looking at the evolution of money in a microcosm. We have seen where the greed-based mindset takes an economy. I think we ought not to walk blindly down a path we already walked once, and hated. That's why we came here, wasn't it?

·
·
·
70
  ·  24 days ago

If these people think the only way to get anything out of Steemit is to BUY their fucking trophies and put them on display, How in the actual fuck did I manage to earn this much money? I didn't BUY this MONEY!!!!

They want participation awards to make themselves feel better. I laugh hard at that and I don't believe in that mentality.

They buy their trophies. Morons. They put their trophies on display! BEST BOWLER EVER!! but you know what... some day someone might want to see them bowl!

Do people not know what WORKING is anymore!!

Anyway... rant over. How's it going? Happy new year.

·
·
·
·
69
  ·  23 days ago

Perhaps it is that the word "rewards" was used instead of income. I believe this word was chosen intentionally, for gamification purposes, but it seems to have backfired and left everyone expecting something for free.

I'm doing well thank you. Spending the day with family I haven't seen in some time, so couldn't really ask for much more.

I hope you're doing well too, and happy new year indeed.

·
·
·
·
·
70
  ·  23 days ago

I've been rewarded in the past, on the job, when they gave me a raise. I had to work for that reward too.

It's this generation of participation awards and entitlement. This is quite the social experiment. Look at what we've discovered.

·
·
·
·
·
·
36
  ·  23 days ago

I'm truly sick of the entitlement culture, its destroying everything, there are less and less people able to create something of worth and out of that small percentage less and less could actually bother as 60 % of the reward will be taken and given to lazy non productive sheep who 100 years ago wouldnt even live past their 25 birthday due to natural selection and lack of welfare.

·
·
·
·
47
  ·  24 days ago

Did you just join? I think if you have been well established in the early days you had a much better shot of being successful than most. I'm definitely not saying you don't deserve to be rewarded for joining early. You do. It's very hard these days to blog your way to success, especially in a sea of shitposts, and that's not even the point. The point is not just that it isn't easy to do, it's that you don't even have to do it.

People don't want participation awards, they want money, and they can make it right now. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying. People have an opportunity to make money by shitposting, we can all plea with them not to shitpost for the good of the platform, but they don't care about the platform succeeding, not until they have significant SP on the line. As long as people can easily make money by shitposting they will. Working hard is a great aspiration, and when you have to work hard to earn something, it's important to be able to work hard. When you don't have to work hard to get something, there are going to be people who don't work.

Hopefully I'm being overly pessimistic here, I dunno.

Hope you have a happy new year as well.

·
·
·
·
·
70
  ·  24 days ago

I joined, when I joined. Started with nothing, didn't know anyone, it was the same place, but without people selling votes. So imagine this for a second. That made it HARDER.

The point is not just that it isn't easy to do

Why does it have to be easy? Since when is life easy? What's wrong with a challenge? I grabbed this thing by the balls! I climbed this mountain! I got to the top! I looked! There was another damn mountain!

Kept going.

Shit post this, shit post that. I don't post shit posts. I've had a few flops. I just kept on going. I don't care about shit posts. They don't bother me. They are not my competition. They are shit posts.

You're being way too pessimistic. If you scroll down to the bottom of my blog... you'll see how I struggled. For some reason you folks see us folks and want what we have. You want it NOW. You don't look to see what it took to actually have what you want.

Hard Work!

If you're here for money, but don't feel like working... you came to the wrong place.

·
·
·
·
·
·
47
  ·  24 days ago

I think we're probably just talking across from one another at this point. I'm not saying it has to be easy, I'm saying it is easy... It's easy to do it the wrong way. There is a huge amount of money to be made with bid bots. Way more than anyone just starting could make by writing quality content. You say you don't care about shit posts, but you should, because shit posts are making 10x what you're making on your legitimate content. They're robbing it from the reward pool and dragging the price of steem down with it.

It's not as simple as convincing people to grab the challenge by the horns for the sake of pride. It's literally convincing people to work hard for scrap instead of cheating to make money hand over fist. People don't much care about pride in that sense.

I don't look at you and want what you have NOW. I look at you and I see a lot of hard work to build a lot of value that people are now robbing from you.

·
·
·
·
·
·
·
70
  ·  24 days ago

I know what those shit posts are doing!

That's why I'm a little bit ticked off. Pardon me.

I'm not working hard for scrap.

Even if I earn less, I'm still doing better.

I don't want to sit and argue back and forth with long boring essays about nothing though. All apologies. I'm done here.

·
·
·
·
50
  ·  23 days ago

Nice comment! I follow you now. Very good post!

·
·
·
50
  ·  24 days ago

But without people buying Steem, would steemhave any value? I think one of the cool idea that came out of steem is that you can actually get paid for your posts. Which you can spend on real world goods/services. Without someone buying steem, steem wouldn't have any physical world value.

·
·
·
·
41
  ·  10 days ago

I bought a little steam to power up but I won't to it again. Steem is currently to expensive and the return for your $ is to small.

I think that with the recent jump in Steem price new users will not make it past plankton any more.

·
·
·
·
·
50
  ·  8 days ago

Isn't that where the bots come in though? Return for your $ by powering up is small so people run to bots to get some views/votes for their $.

·
·
·
47
  ·  24 days ago

By progress I simply mean getting to "the top" having high SP. You are correct that you can just put your SBD into SP, but you still have to earn that SBD in the first place. I don't really expect to get very far here. I am a "blogger" on a platform that is 100% other bloggers. It does not have people who are passive viewers because there is nothing of value here to passive viewers. I don't mean to cast judgement on people's content here, but it isn't anything that you couldn't find on a blog or reddit. Hopefully that will change considering how much better this is for content creators.

I have been playing the game because I'm just curious to see how it goes. I have slowly built up to 100 followers, probably only a few of which are interested in my content. They all just want to trade upvotes. That's okay, but it's not a real content provider-content consumer relationship. Many of the whales get comments and upvotes because people are praying they can get "blessed" with an upvote, not because they genuinely want to consume the content. If a whale moved to a non-rewards platform, their viewership from Steemit would likely plummet.

I agree with you that vote buying will kill Steem, and I agree that the only option is to target the sellers. They are handing out free money on a street corner. To try to convince people to not take the money and go get a job instead is just foolish. It's not in line with human nature. People would rather get $50 out of Steem today with bid bots than work hard over the next few months and get $500. You cannot plea with them not to take the money by pointing out the damage they cause, because they have nothing invested in the platform. If they don't use bid bots, they'll allow some percentage of people to still have a healthy platform to make the $500, but as a result, most will likely not ever even get their $50.

It is for this reason that I don't plan to invest long term here. I put in money, I'm really not liking what I'm seeing right now, so I'm taking it out. I plan on sticking around and commenting. Being a viewer, since I think that's what Steemit needs most, but the way this whole thing is going gives people every reason to suck it dry, and no reasons to invest into it properly.

Hopefully I'm wrong.

·
·
·
·
41
  ·  10 days ago
It is for this reason that I don't plan to invest long term here. I put in money, I'm really not liking what I'm seeing right now, so I'm taking it out. I plan on sticking around and commenting. Being a viewer, since I think that's what Steemit needs most, but the way this whole thing is going gives people every reason to suck it dry, and no reasons to invest into it properly.

The same conclusion I came today as well. I might not down power right away but I certainly won't put any more money in. And I also will stop shilling on other platforms. I only shill what I truly believe in.

·
·
·
55
  ·  23 days ago

I like that response of yours. There really is no need to buy a vote. If a person is willing to buy a vote, then they are willing to sell their vote. That is not and never has been an acceptable behavior, at least not an acceptable behavior to me I should clarify. To each their own I guess.

·
·
·
41
  ·  10 days ago

I fear that Steemit reaches the point where new user have no chance to make it past plankton any more.

For example you suggest: “Buy STEEM to power up with.” Not an option any more. One year ago you could buy yourself up to be a Minnow for ≈$350. But with Steem and Steam-Power currently at $5,88 that would need ≈$12'000 to become Minnow.

·
·
54
  ·  22 days ago

its literally the only way for the majority of users to make any sort of progress

That's simply not true. We can make progress without bid bots but it just takes more effort to create something of value. It doesn't necessarily mean your post will get the rewards it probably deserved compared to the volumes of crap being self-voted and bid botted to trending but at least you will have one the thing these shitposters lack. Integrity and sense of a job well done.

Sure, those things aren't going to pay the bills but, if we really want this platform to change for the better, we have to start with ourselves. I've taken a difficult stance towards bid bots and self voting. Something just feels kind of messed about the whole system. I think if we want the world to look at Steem as a legit platform, we need to get away from this vote selling because tbh those things scream Ponzi scheme.

We should all have an equal voice with fair opportunity for rewards. What we have done by allowing bid bots is allow the sweat equity principle to go to the wayside. We've basically said forget about working hard to create quality content. If you don't have $$$ to use a bid bot or self vote (injecting perception of value into your content using stake), your voice isn't as important than those that do. I cannot support such a thing.

·
·
·
41
  ·  10 days ago

I have to disagree with your first paragraph: The self-voters and vote-buyers take so much out of the system that there not enough left for honest users.

I see one posting, with a promised $0.0x reward, not paying out after the other. On payout day it drops from $0.0x to $0.00. I don't care about the penny. It's the lack of appreciation what hurts.

And it's the other way around as well: if I upvote then other person won't even get a single penny either. I even bought some steem to power up so my votes count. But with Steem at $5 I can't really buy enough steem to make a difference. The only thing that happened: I lost my new user delegation.

The combination of bit bots, self vote and hight steem price endanger the platform.

·
·
·
·
54
  ·  10 days ago

@krischik

The combination of bit bots, self vote and hight steem price endanger the platform.

I agree. That's why I opt out but keep posting.

·
·
41
  ·  10 days ago

You are absolutely right. This is why selling votes should be punished. A temporary ban might be a way. But I don't know if the blockchain has actually provisions for bans at all.

·
50
  ·  24 days ago

I agree. 1 account flagging people won't be changing anything. Which it shouldn't anyways.

·
65
  ·  23 days ago

When a whale votes everybody elses vote has some payout taken away.
When a whale delegates the weight of everybodys sp drops.
If only one vote is cast all the reward pool goes to that one
vote.

If the top wasnt sucking it all up we could easily see minnow rewards double.
Its just a fact in the math.

·
·
41
  ·  10 days ago

And if you are plankton you don't get any rewards at all any more. Something needs to be done.

·
·
·
65
  ·  10 days ago

Something was done, and it led to this.
It is hard to get established, but that is true in any business.

Just keep putting out your content and your audience will find you.

·
28
  ·  24 days ago

hahaha.. what the hell is happening in here? first doge now cat!! whats next? its just insane :)

·
27
  ·  11 days ago

that is so true and could't be said better

·
53
  ·  7 days ago

Actually, it's not true. Selling votes is the equivalent of purchasing advertising space on a billboard, racing jersey, etc... Those with valuable content, but not enough steem power, it is the only way to get noticed quickly. In Steem, users with the most steem power, followers and votes, trend to the top. The rich just get richer and the poor stay poor.

Voting bots offer the ability for users with quality content to remain competitive with others that are hoarding all the voting influence. Voting bots actually make things fair for new steemians. It's economics.

·
46
  ·  18 days ago

It is a shame to find out that this kind of activity is happening on Steemit. I thought that I was becoming involved with a group that was about the manipulation that i have seen on Reddit and others.

I know that there is always going to be a way to work the system, but this is just unfair and buries the new new guys before they can get started.

With that being said , I think the 7 day reward window is to short for individuals that want to build long term relevant materials. What about the fact that the material could be found later and keep finding new audience members. What if the information is seasonal and comes back around to relevance each year?

These encourages short windowed articles that are thin in content.

·
35
  ·  24 days ago

Nice and good posts ..more of it..
Your upvotes on this post, and in the comments, would suggest to me that you're as much of a greedy abuser of the system as the villains you are trying to paint for us.

·
25
  ·  23 days ago

www.htdthis.blogspot.com

62
  ·  9 days ago

What you do is not cool and I could debate these points to the end of the moon to prove my case.

63
  ·  24 days ago

This is something I definitely support. But I think the bigger problem is the selling regardless of quality. Spam plagiarism and all kinds of shitposts are getting to the trending page.

·
52
  ·  24 days ago

Omg...I live in a fictional world. If the rules say to write the original quality text, then I try and do so. And it turns out tt spam articles in the top and the less effort the more popular. Nevertheless, I would be ashamed to copy someone's work. But this is upon conscience of everyone.
Too upset now. Will go to make a coffee and calm down...

·
·
50
  ·  24 days ago

I'll join you for coffee. Buying upvotes, IMO, is just buying visibility. People who already have a lot of SP and/or powerful friends can enjoy that without voting bots. Obviously, rising to the top has little to do with quality most of the time and a lot to do with the SP one can command either through buying, having, or working with others.

I will say most bots are pretty crappy and getting crappier so far as the value they give for payments anyway. I hope everybody who wants to buy votes knows how to use this Steem bot tracker: http://s3.amazonaws.com/yabapmatt/bottracker/bottracker.html

·
39
  ·  18 days ago

Spam plagiarism and all kinds of shitposts are getting to the trending page.

Thats the main reason i dislike the site. Also there is no way to block bots that spam generic shit on everyone of my posts.

·
15
  ·  24 days ago

give me vote and follow i also give you vote and follow and also like this comment

73
  ·  24 days ago

I mean...I'm not opposed to this...

At some point we need to realize that these vote-selling services are really only directing the limited daily rewards to mostly shitposts. The people offering the votes for sale are being paid regardless of the quality of content being upvoted, so they really don't have any reason to care how the pool is allocated. And the ones selling the votes powered by delegation have even less reason to care.

I say, do what you want with your downvotes. If these services and users can't overcome the effects of counter-votes, then I guess they don't have much support after all and the stake-weighted market will have spoken.

This is just a social media site anyway (and not even a good one). Sometimes we tend to take things a little too seriously when it comes to upvotes and downvotes...because money.

·
61
  ·  24 days ago

too bad this post is coming from someone who isnt the greatest example. A better push and implementation would be nice

·
·
38
  ·  24 days ago

He does not have the moral right to post such.

·
·
64
  ·  24 days ago

it's witnesses imho like him and other not so fuzzy types who have the cajones to give a damn about the overall well being of the platform, just my two little pesos

·
·
47
  ·  24 days ago

Screenshot-2017-12-9-(1)-Steemit-Chat.jpg

·
·
33
  ·  24 days ago

True

·
60
  ·  24 days ago

I myself is not of this idea as a whole of these vote selling, but I don't know what this @grumpycat has to do with this thing posts not older than 3.5 days? Why don't you guys make a rule of not upvoting low posts? It is really irritating to see guys posting a single pic or a quote and pay for upvotes. Why would someone even try to produce something good if they know that they can pay for an upvote.
Me myself try to produce something good, but alas coz of no upvotes, I have to pay for upvotes to get that exposure. But I guess no body even cares for you when you are not of the value to them. But yeah still I believe in working hard and will continue to do it.

·
·
54
  ·  24 days ago
It is really irritating to see guys posting a single pic or a quote and pay for upvotes
You mean like this?: https://steemit.com/life/@aftabkhan10/black-and-white-challenge-or-share-your-guesses

I can't see the problem with paying for upvotes, it's not much different than paying for ads. You become more visible, but if people don't like your content you won't earn money on it anyway. Unless, you have a lot of steem power and powerful friends or fans (which is a bigger problem).

·
·
·
60
  ·  24 days ago

Lol, you gotta be an idiot to not understand what I meant by what I said.

·
·
·
·
54
  ·  24 days ago

Sorry, it would have been easier to understand if you wrote in English...

·
·
·
·
·
60
  ·  24 days ago

Well I guess people in Norway speak English, right?

·
·
·
30
  ·  24 days ago

I went to that post, it's a black and white photo challenge and he had some interesting speculations. It's not deep but I don't think he was just filling space for money. I don't understand judging it, if you don't like it why don't you just move along? I'm seriously asking why it matters to you if there is any possibility that your wrong that he is just throwing something up there to get upvotes from bots and friends. I am sincerely asking, I don't get it why you care.

·
33
  ·  24 days ago

seriously people vote for money we need to change aur minds

·
·
15
  ·  24 days ago

give me vote and follow i also give you vote and follow and also like this comment

·
25
  ·  24 days ago

Miaau miauu prr. great job miuaau.

·
25
  ·  24 days ago

I really hadn't known about this concept of thought. We shouldn't be taking things too seriously.

·
47
  ·  24 days ago

thanks for upvote and resteem

53
  ·  24 days ago

My oh my. The more I interact around this topic, the more clear to me it is how much misinformation and misunderstanding is going around here. Even by witnesses. Let's try to fix some of that, shall we?

Let's take as a suggestion that you could only upvote posts for the aforementioned 3.5 hours. What would people gain? Who would lose? How would it change matters?

The long and short of it is that those who write posts that take longer to consume, and that draw an audience over an extended period of time will suffer, as their window to get paid in shrinks.

All those shitposters? They won't lose anything, if anything, they'll gain due to their pay-out being mostly dependent on the short-term anyway, and not being harmed due to how quickly it is that you can consume their content is.

So, what about the so-called stated goal of this, to curtail vote manipulation, especially by buying votes? That's nonsense. It'd do no such thing.

Let's start with this, suppose you could cut down the voting period down to 3.5 days, or even 2 days, wouldn't those people just vote at that juncture? Answer: They would. So what would cutting down the time-frame do? It's not that it'll do nothing, but all it'd do is make it easier for more people to see that this post has been massively upvoted by a bot, and give them the option to downvote it.

But if people really want to do that, they can just follow the upvote accounts and monitor them directly. It's also, sadly, not too relevant to most users, whose downvote power is too small, and who need to keep their voting power to upvote relevant stuff.

But here we see the real reason the whales want it, because if you upvote something 1-2 minutes before it locks out, then the whales can't really be expected to downvote it. So indirectly, if you limit the vote buying window, whales could do something about it. But there are two important things to note from how this works:

  1. If you simply shortened the upvote period, it won't really help, as the whales (or whoever's on downvote duty) need there to be a period of time between when the upvote is cast to when the downvote is given. If you simply make it all happen, in say, 24 hours, then it couldn't happen.
  2. The voting window has nothing to do with the reward pool directly, it's more that voting by bots as a whole is disagreeable to @grumpycat here. Just that if the upvotes happen early enough he and others in his position could decide what to do about it.

I'd also like to note that while I understand why Grumpy is threatening to downvote the upvote buyers, because he can't really threaten the upvote bots themselves, I don't think it'd work out too well, because most people buying those upvotes, quite likely, don't even understand the situation, and to them, the downvotes will come out of nowhere. If the downvotes won't even be accompanied by a message explaining the situation, they will think they were just randomly downvoted. A thing to keep in mind for the downvotes you handed yesterday to people who bought votes from Blocktrades, Grumpy. If you want to spread the lesson, then people have to know why they got downvoted, which quite likely will make them spread the lesson around on their own.

Now, I want to throw a word or two to people buying upvotes. You're not actually earning money. At least not liquid money. I saw someone yesterday who spent 16 SBD to buy upvotes from two bots. Their takeback? 12.25 SBD. So they just spent some SBD. They basically got back what they paid for.

If you don't think your content is good enough to attract more people, either to upvote, or follow your following content and upvote it organically, then just don't bother. You're not actually making money out of it. You're just basically recycling the money. And the money you'll get back from the post you just had the bot upvote? You got it, you're just going to pay the bot to upvote your next post.

So what and who is bot-voting good for? To be blunt? The person you're paying. They're just flat out getting the money you pay them, and due to the way in which Steemit works, they essentially get it "for free". They'd get the same curation rewards no matter what it is they upvote, but you also paid them extra. And you didn't really get nothing out of it. How does that feel?

There are "upvote trading/collecting" groups, which are different. That's not too different from a group of friends pooling their upvotes to help one another grow.

How can the whole situation actually be fixed? To be frank, I don't see any real option. So long those with the power can just upvote, and those without are at their mercy, this sort of situation will continue. One thing is for certain, cutting down voting time won't really change anything, and Grumpy's suggestion is a bandaid that will be used to punish those who buy votes, rather than actually directly handle the situation with the reward pool itself.


P.S. I think this might be worth reposting as a post on my own account, just because the misunderstanding surrounding this topic is so prevalent. Tell me what you think, or if I got anything wrong.

·
49
  ·  24 days ago

Upvoted. Great comment that warrants further discussion. The last paragraph sums it up and I agree completely - this is just putting a bandaid on a systemic problem that faces this platform. I am not sure if there is even a solution as steemit exists in its current form. The manner in which "Money talks" may have to be rewritten entirely. Perhaps this explains the push to SMTs - to deflect from the problems here, kicking the can down the road. Who knows.

·
·
53
  ·  24 days ago

I'm going to find some time this week to read up on SMTs. I am saying upfront that my understanding of SMTs right now is beyond shoddy. And well, you can see that I'm the sort of person who tries to not talk about what they don't understand.

But, if SMTs are basically going to just piggyback on Steemit, or copy its system, then I see a way in which they could help the whole situation, or not:

Help: If I were to base a system off of Steemit, after seeing the current situation, I'd like it fixed before copying it. Which might lead to someone coming up with some solution.

Not help: If those SMTs end up with the company running them sitting on almost all of their tokens, and without whales, then they could postpone the situation's issues for quite some time. Years, even, perhaps.

P.S. Made it into its own post.

·
66
  ·  24 days ago

Let's take as a suggestion that you could only upvote posts for the aforementioned 3.5 hours.

Do you mean days?

It's already tough enough for those of us who write posts that take 4+ hours to write and 30+ minutes to read with the 7 day limitation.

I've not seen any of these from you yet if i'm honest.

Some of us make content that is long-term useful and takes longer to appreciate, and if anything, we'd like to get a bigger window of upvotes, and also better ways for people to find our content.

A lot of the active stuff is stored in memory - do you have technical knowledge around this? Maybe you could put forward 2 week window with hardware requirements to the team?


The 3.5 days is a suggestion of the shortening of the Bot vote time window, not the post window. This would give GC and others time to find and flag the rubbish if need be.

Oh, and I got a nice return from a bot today. You just need to know who and when.

·
·
53
  ·  24 days ago

Do you mean days?

Yup, fixed, thanks.

I've not seen any of these from you yet if i'm honest.

The Shirobako/Nisekoi posts took that amount of time. The "10 shows to watch" alongside editing, feedback gathering and all, took about 20 hours.

A lot of the active stuff is stored in memory - do you have technical knowledge around this? Maybe you could put forward 2 week window with hardware requirements to the team?

Sadly, I don't, and I understand the nature of technical limitations. But this is about people who are talking about "Shoulds" from a moral perspective, not a technical one.

The 3.5 days is a suggestion of the shortening of the Bot vote time window, not the post window. This would give GC and others time to find and flag the rubbish if need be.

Yes, that's a summary of what I posted, minus some of the surrounding logic. I also took the time to answer people who recommended shortening the post window alongside it, in the comments, not Grumpycat itself.

63
  ·  24 days ago
  • Why are you listing only a few bidbots, when there's a lot more than that? http://steembottracker.com/
  • You have been raping the reward pool yourself, I don't see the point of trying to police the platform when your own practices are corrupt. Get straight or get out.
·
70
  ·  24 days ago

I'm sure he'll take your suggestion under due advisement, while he dives into his Scrooge McDuck vault:

Abuse 3.png

·
·
47
  ·  24 days ago

I've never seen a shit post worth five figures before.

·
·
63
  ·  19 days ago

Says the girl who votes primarily on her boyfriend.

61
  ·  24 days ago

What does it even matter? I've used vote purchasing services in the past and found that the reward was not worth the cost. I'd have been further ahead with the smaller reward and keeping my initial investment.

59
  ·  23 days ago

Great post and honestly strikes up great conversation. And that is one of the great things of this platform. Thank you for your post.

47
  ·  24 days ago

why are there skirmishes breaking out? It makes me sad.

·
49
  ·  24 days ago

The skirmishes are perhaps a consequence of steem's poor performance relative to #bitcoin and other leading cryptocurrencies. At its highs in 2016, steem was worth over 0.006 BTC. Some of the whales may finally be realizing that the value of steem is inextricably tied to the crypto community's perception of steemit as a platform. Until that perception improves via constructive changes to steemit itself, then steem will likely continue to lag the broader market.

·
·
47
  ·  24 days ago

seems like a short sighted panic over an over amplified fear. everyone on here today will eventually reach the level of a whale, it is built in the automation of the system.

I am seeing a lot of outcries and a sense of entitlement from people who have not put into the work or effort and are crying why they too can not yet be financially independent using SteemIt. Steem will grow the more people learn how to use it and the more development is done on it to replace current social media sites.

instant gratification and whining is not going to make it better, it is only going to make people dread coming here as this too gets polluted by that whiny entitled crowd.

the irony is that people seem to be paying out large sums of rewards for people to complain.

what if there is a large segment of internet users who really love GIFs? why can't they use SteemIt and profit from it, why is that considered of less value to someone who posts a long essay about the story of genesis?

I think the flagging feature is being abused by suppressors of free speech. micro transactions for micro-blogging and micro-posts. It is not a winner take all economy, it is a shared micro economy.

so I will upvote any and all comments and posts of users and things I like, and that is what makes this platform so awesome.

would you rather Instagram and other social media companies generate unshared value from all your likes and comments on their platforms?

too much slave on slave hate.

·
·
44
  ·  24 days ago

"the value of steem is inextricably tied to the crypto community's perception of steemit as a platform" Worth a follow right there

This is absolutely true and that perception will only change with growth plus a functioning system that is not engaged in constant civil war.

·
·
50
  ·  23 days ago

When did Bitcoin come out?
When did Steem come out?

what will your life look like when one steem is equal one current bitcoin?
will you be supporting grumpy cat? or better users?

the choice is yours

·
·
·
49
  ·  23 days ago

Bitcoin is not distinctly associated with a social media / blogging platform the way that steem is. The value of steem, in my opinion, is inextricably tied to the perception of this platform. Very few exchanges offer it for trading/investing. Accordingly, the daily trading liquidity is minuscule compared to the Top 10 cryptos. Unless it is marketed with a focus more on the benefits of the steem blockchain itself. Which may in fact be happening with the push towards SMTs.

·
·
·
·
50
  ·  19 days ago

well I think it had been the best social media experience until winner takes all mentality, I am assuming the majority of who are new, started wanting to control how the platform can move to satisfy their needs instead of realizing that this is an automatic system and we each are independent as well as dependent to make it work.

i've met some awesome people and had some great discussions on here so far, combined with the file storage capacities. This is a revolution and I am not sure why the media is not reporting on what could be the great invention to benefit mankind since the technoevolution

·
47
  ·  24 days ago

Well, there is a lot at stake. It's kind of a free for all here. Basically, the only way any sort of order can be implemented is if the top players use their power to strike down anything that doesn't match their vision. It ends up being mayhem because there are so many people with differing visions, but I'm glad there are people who care enough to prevent the platform from moving in directions that will make it die. It is rough to see, but it is certainly an interesting sociological phenomenon.

·
·
70
  ·  24 days ago

This just highlights the failures of decentralized anarcho-capitilism and how it leads to warring tribes and fascists imposing themselves with violence. Oh the irony.

·
·
39
  ·  24 days ago

The internet is turning into the human version of hivemind. It's fascinating to take a step back and look at the evolution from a macro-scale. The paradigm shift from losing money off the internet to making money off the internet for the casual user does indeed have high stakes.

·
·
36
  ·  20 days ago

"Basically, the only way any sort of order can be implemented is if the top players use their power to strike down anything that doesn't match their vision."

War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength.

·
49
  ·  24 days ago

Sorry see the bright side

·
39
  ·  24 days ago


Hurry,take notes...change of plans.

·
·
47
  ·  23 days ago

this human gets it,
why can't you?

·
15
  ·  24 days ago

give me vote and follow i also give you vote and follow

·
·
47
  ·  23 days ago

low standards man

57
  ·  24 days ago

Though i buy upvotes, i strongly support this. There should be more and more people like @grumpycat who will flag down the junk. If we want to see steemit as the best alternative to all the other social networks, certain measures are to be taken by steemians. I am tired of buying upvotes to grow on this community. I do post original content regularly and still achieve nothing. At the end of the day, i still had to buy a upvote just to earn 0.5 sbd more. What's the use when only the rich gets awarded ? It's high time we earn with content and not by buying upvotes. Welcome @grumpycat Good concept and waiting for your execution.

67
  ·  24 days ago

I think it's more logical to promote a post sooner than later to maximize the effect. Some people might be testing the waters, promoting older posts after seeing lack of success.

·
52
  ·  24 days ago

Still can't understand why people voting on post 1 or more days after if the best time for this when the post is "fresh"...

·
·
66
  ·  24 days ago

I do it to let my followers in who are not online every day. This way they benefit from more curation rewards. Also, some accounts will not vote on posts that have been artificially inflated.

·
·
·
67
  ·  7 days ago

I see very good points here. Promoting with bid bots after 1-2 days will increase the curation rewards of those who voted prior to promotion. Let's just make sure we provide valuable content and follow the rules. @grumpycat is in action!

·
·
·
·
66
  ·  6 days ago

That's my plan😁✌🏽

·
15
  ·  24 days ago

give me vote and follow i also give you vote and follow and also like this comment

·
·
15
  ·  24 days ago

give me vote and follow i also give you vote and follow and also like this comment

·
·
·
39
  ·  24 days ago

STOP FUCKING SPAMING

57
  ·  24 days ago

even though this post itself has so many paid votes 😂😂😂

59
  ·  24 days ago

I hate shit this. More auto flagging bots on steemit means more problems. Steemit is confusing for new members, now they gotta learn all this stuff as well. For a ''decentralized'' platform there are alot of rules to keep track of. I also see that i am maybe to only negative comment in the post, i cant believe that an auto spamming bot account would get so much love considering how hated the rest of the auto spamming bot are. I might get flagged but whatever.

And just to finish off, this grumpycat account has made 1 post and the payout so far is $540. Wheres that money go? into the community it's ''serving'' are the owners pockets. Yeah, thought so......

Auto Flag (spam) bots = big money for owners. Dont pretend your helping others by forcing rules and filling your pockets.

I might be way off with comment and if so, im sorry but to me it looks like another spam bot.

·
63
  ·  24 days ago

De-centralised means the community decides the rules, not that there aren't any.

Grumpycat has a huge investment into this platform, so that will explain why these posts are high value.

56
  ·  24 days ago

Dear, my brothers will send you wonderful goat milk to wet lips of compliant cat protecting the riches of Steemers everywhere. You will be a fat cat from the milks of finest goats. Return the riches to every ones quickly.

·
64
  ·  24 days ago

some days I'm so freaking glad I'm lactose intolerant .....

·
53
  ·  24 days ago

Great one

·
·
15
  ·  24 days ago

give me vote and follow i also give you vote and follow to every post and also like this comment

·
·
·
50
  ·  24 days ago

Does spamming like this actually ever work?

·
34
  ·  24 days ago

hahahahh....i will also add a bowl of honey to that...

·
54
  ·  18 days ago

lol

49
  ·  24 days ago

Perhaps this could be implemented across the platform by simply not allowing upvotes after 72 hours?

In defense of the more reputable bot services, they appear to be the only way that newer users without sizeable follower counts can garner attention to their posts. Otherwise, their content often gets lost in the mix amidst the trending posts published by more established users.

I say this from experience after hardly ever using bots in the past and only recently employing them. I don't think bots are an ideal mechanism by which rewards should be distributed to begin with. But the platform as it is structured right now enables this system.

It is at least reassuring to see that whales such as yourself are mindful of the abuses that are occurring on steemit. But on a more holistic level, this is just placing a bandage on an open wound - while it addresses a symptom, it doesn't delve into the systemic deficiencies that have spurred the disparities in reward distribution to begin with.

Ultimately, I am not sure what the solution is, but it will likely require a meeting of the minds among whales that actually care about the long term viability of this platform to initiate constructive changes. This appears to be a step in that direction; if nothing else, it will spur much needed discussion and ideas for appropriate corrective actions to be taken. For steemit's sake.

·
53
  ·  24 days ago

Perhaps this could be implemented across the platform by simply not allowing upvotes after 72 hours?

It's already tough enough for those of us who write posts that take 4+ hours to write and 30+ minutes to read with the 7 day limitation.

Your idea is only going to further help the shitpost or easily consumable content creators. Some of us make content that is long-term useful and takes longer to appreciate, and if anything, we'd like to get a bigger window of upvotes, and also better ways for people to find our content.

·
·
49
  ·  24 days ago

Fair enough. But with the upvote abuse that is evidently rampant with the existing seven day window, I can't imagine what it would be like if this window was extended even further. I understand your point regarding the time and effort put into writing quality posts - I have written about this issue myself, and my post upholds the utility that bots offer serious contributors without sizeable follower counts in trying to get recognition. It is simply impossible under the current paradigm as it exists across the platform - whales and those they support will invariably get the most attention drawn to their content via the trending section.

·
·
·
53
  ·  24 days ago

Forgive me, but I decided to answer this as its own comment in order to hopefully spread the information, and because it's gotten long enough.

·
·
·
54
  ·  24 days ago

Software that uses a Steem node can respond in seconds to a payment. Do you think a seven days limit prevents a script from responding?

·
·
·
·
52
  ·  23 days ago

I just made a post called "Decentralized Up-Votes...

COIN MAN by @pocketechange

·
66
  ·  24 days ago

Perhaps this could be implemented across the platform by simply not allowing upvotes after 72 hours?

It's easy for the bot owners to make this change, yes. And personally, If i was a bot owner I would go with this plan.

I would see this as a chance to make a big deal about it and advertise the fact that you are helping give time for 'the cat' to flag the 'poor content'. I think the Bot owner who takes this stance first will do well.

3/4 days is plenty of time to Bot a post, I must admit to waiting this long purely to let my followers who aren't around every day a change to get in before extra $$ comes so their curation is boosted.

Cheers!

·
15
  ·  24 days ago

give me vote and follow i also give you vote and follow to every post and also like this comment

·
·
25
  ·  24 days ago

come on why did i just do that?

63
  ·  24 days ago

Instead us who don't pay for votes will get 100% votes from you, amr, amr?! :D.

I do a weekly #runforsteem challenge that could use some exposure next week. Starting every saturday. Don't vote for it today, it's the last day of the challenge and a new one begins tonight.

So far we have runners from the UK, Germany, the US who run, post their results and I pay them for it ones a week. Check us out if you like to earn while working out.

If this begging was too obvious, I don't regret it. It's a good thing ;)

Hugs!

Jumowa

59
  ·  23 days ago

The truth hurts...

61
  ·  24 days ago

People will abuse the upvote bots because money and greed is involved. But there are people that try their best to produce good content and use the upvote bots b/c they wish to stay on this platform and gain monetarily just like the dolphins/whales.

But can anyone just place a regulation on services here? And if they do not like what is going on, downvote?

Not everyone that is using the upvote bots will see this post, so I guess they will eventually figure it out when they use the bot after 3.5 days... (And how was the 3.5 days determined???)

66
  ·  24 days ago

Kind of ironic to make a post about reward pool rape when you upvote your own comments "SBD Correction" for $140 10+ times/day for weeks.

You did pretty fucking well raping the reward pool last week posting a single comment "SBD Correction" over and over and upvoting it. In fact, you probably made more in the last week than every person who submitted a post older than 3.5 days in the last month combined pulling in almost $20K USD posting "Place Holder" and "SBD Correction" comments.

You destroyed all the posts my curation team worked on for the week because my delegator flagged you for doing the above. You also went and flagged me which I assume for the same reason. My curation team who spends hours every day giving back to the community had nothing to do with anything, and you decided to destroy all their work because you got flagged for doing just what you are fighting against. I had nothing to do with your reward pool rape and the fact you got flagged for it, but you decided to attack me too.

You are just a terrorist and it sounds like you just want to rape the reward pool and randomly flag.

While I don't disagree with not accepting posts after a certain point, I have been planning on locking it off for 5 days, you are the last one to be preaching about reward pool rape and there is no doubt you will just rape the reward pool yourself or flag anyway, what's the point?

·
56
  ·  23 days ago

lNEg8.gif

MarkyMark, those are some pretty damn good points and indeed the grumpy cat has done it and it has been doing the things which he intend to stop to so Mr.Cat how does it justify ur work that u want to do.

and just look at this ur reply, kitty ur comment is just "fixed" and nothing else how the fuck is it worth a 131$ upvote. U have ur power but the thing is u are raping the pool more than others. so idk what u want to do by doing that limiting off time on bid bots.

·
58
  ·  24 days ago

This is true. Seen it with my own eyes.

·