RE: Non-GumpyCompliant vote sellers are now to be used exclusively to profit from the reward pool!

[r351574nc3]

Also, @grumpycat dinged me on a post that was only 2.5 days old https://steemit.com/sportsphotography/@r351574nc3/tucson-soccerfest-sunset#@grumpycat/re-r351574nc3-tucson-soccerfest-sunset-20180117t025602468z

I might be leaning more toward random.

Comments

[tagsplanet]

I still think it is not random. It is not only about the time, read the first few lines on the comment and you'll understand, I hope.

[r351574nc3]

I've read it. You'll have to spell it out for me. I'm not sure what you're referring to.

Let's say for the sake of argument it's not random, then it's arbitrary. @grumpycat arbitrarily chooses. Here are my points.

1. @brandonfrye uses @jerrybanfield which is listed as a compliant voting bot. Not only is it compliant, but also @brandonfrye gets dinged within a day of posting. He did not abuse the voting bot nor did he use an abusive voting bot, so why? You should read @grumpycat's response. https://steemit.com/steemit/@brandonfrye/steemit-upvote-bots-still-profitable-or-waste-of-money
2. @purepinay used @appreciator which is also one of the compliant voting bots. She also got dinged and took it like a champ anyway. Read @grumpycat's response https://steemit.com/steemit/@purepinay/thinking-about-tomorrow-today-reinvest-and-power-up

Even better...@grumpycat also uses @appreciator

So maybe it's not random. If it's not, then it's definitely based on an arbitrary set of rules that can be changed on a whim because they have nothing to do with actually compliant voting bots or 6th day voting. It's more like

Just because