The problem with "the code allows it" is that you evade the responsibility to speak up against injustices and the dilemma is clearly that who remain are those who don't care and those that condone the abuse. Clearly every stakeholder has a responsibility to condemn abuse or outright stop it with their stake, or do you really think that the consequences won't proliferate into an atmosphere completely against community?
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Well I agree to your argument but I can also understand that not every Steem user is a content creator, developer or witness. Most people you upvote them self are purely investors and they like to see ROI. In order to be able to create income for them they have to hold on to their large Steempower which is a good thing. I hear many users complaining about the price of steem...and thats why we need more investors on the platform who are willing to increase their steempower. This platform also can't survive just by content creators who keep on selling their earned Steems to the market. We need to make everybody happy here on Steem...content creators, developers, witnesses and Investors.
Posted using Partiko Android
Yes, I really can understand your point and it is the investors responsibility to do the best for this platform in order to make it a success. But still in my opinion it ultimatley comes down to why did Dan Larimer implemented self-voting? I'm not quite sure about that but as long the users can use that method they probably will. So who you wanna blame for this situation the investor who is using his tools or the Developer who created it? I'm personaly not a fan of self-voting I only do it for my own posts which I want to be seen. But I also delegate half of my SP to bots and the other half I use for curation. I might be a "small" investor but still I using some of the ROI tools that Steem offers and thats also part of it why I think Steem is great for generating passive income.
Posted using Partiko Android
Lol, I just said that I'm not posting with the reason of self-voting or whatever. If you look at my posts I do deliver quality but if you just wanna bash me thats fine...I don't care. I'm involved even in a local steem meetup group so don't blame me for the things that others are abusing this System. I'm just saying that users like hajin who really don't vote for others are only looking for short term ROI and they still can do it. So Steem should think about some kind of system where even guys like him can get their needs satisfied without posting garbage. But only complain about this people and try to talk moraly wont help anybody here. We need working systems were everybody ia happy and fits into his role.
Posted using Partiko Android
Because not everything is just black and white. Bots do have an important role to play for people who use them wisely. If you want make your good quality post (maybe you have developed an App or Project that needs attention) than you can spent money on Bots to promote your post. That is not a bad thing and if people like me delegate to a Bot I'm loosing out on curation profit. Therefore the Bot pays me some Steem out. And you should also think about whales with 100K SP. If they want to curate their power to 100+ people a day thats not possible. Thats why they need the curation made automatically with a Bot.
Posted using Partiko Android