If bots could stop spamming up the comments of every post, that would be great. Tone it down.
Encouraging bots to fill up comments instead of actual people is taking value away from Steemit.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
If bots could stop spamming up the comments of every post, that would be great. Tone it down.
Encouraging bots to fill up comments instead of actual people is taking value away from Steemit.
@pfunk Thanks for stopping by and I don't disagree at all actually. And the goal here is to produce higher quality bots. Some of these will be chatterbots and if you don't want them all you need to do is add #STEEMBOTSTAY to your posting to keep them out. Any bot that is complying with the code of conduct would obey that and stay away from your thread. Hence, we call them leash codes.
A bot is nothing more than a pet and the current system provides strong economic incentives for building a chatterspam bot. All we're going to do is change it so that if you say "Gee what was the name of that guy who invented bitcoin?" a bot is smart enough to reply with something along the lines of "Oh do you mean Satoshi Nakamoto?" instead of some retarded meme.
That doesn't detract from the value, it adds to the value and makes the place a more fun environment.
Bots are here, they aren't going anywhere and they are only going to get better. It's imperative that we establish guidelines and rules as to what is and is not acceptable behavior and if the bot happens to pass a turing test in the process then I really don't see the problem. There are already tons of people on here that post like they are bots rather than putting thought and effort into the post.
See where this is going?
@pfunk would you please remove your downvote from @calva and any other bot in this thread? You don't have to remove it globally, but in here I'm intentionally making them part of the conversation to prove a point and downvoting them is interfering with that, it's taking value away from the conversation.
Thanks!
Bad idea. Nobody should need to take any affirmative action to keep bots away. Keep them away by default.
And no, I won't remove my downvote from calva. https://steemit.com/steemit/@calva/my-bot-calva-give-you-the-price-of-eth-and-btc-if-you-call-him
I'm not unilaterally opposed to bots commenting but any bot that comments without affirmative human prompting is unnecessary and unwanted. Further, bots that don't offer any real value (subjective yes, but my vote is subjective) and spam a lot of posts as if they do (like calva) should be downvoted.
@anyx I noticed you upvoted @pfunk on this. I respect your opinion deeply, and am curious if you understand what he's stating vs what I propose?
These aren't at cross purposes. We're in a place with a lot of bots right now. If we can get the existing bot owners to respect certain rules then the value add is enormous. Especially if we can reward well behaved bots.
However, just like people downvote @cheetah just for being a bot doing a job. I mean really, would #STEEMBOTSTAY convince @cheetah not to check for plagarism in a thread?
No of course not!
@cheetah is going to be there regardless of whether the leashcode is present or not.
@pfunk this is what I mean...
I can't make ANYONE adopt a leash code unless they use this platform where I have the ability to put that sort of thing in there. Ergo, code of conduct and respecting leash codes.
But @cheetah isn't my bot. It belongs to @anyx and he can do as he pleases. What he's doing right now is a direct benefit to the community. But @pfunk you're saying that @cheetah should just butt out and let the humans sort out things like that right, amirite?
If not then how else is a bot to divine your intent?
@anyx I gave you ideas on how to improve cheetah via distributed methods. None of those ideas would provide a negative impact to the platform. I consider you part of STEEMBOTS because I already know you're an ethical bot builder trying to build the very best bot you can.
Yet you still have a bot, that jumps into human conversation regardless of if the human who posted the topic wanted you there. @cheetah is just an extension of your will and people respect that because....
He is high quality and adds value to the platform.
But by upvoting pfunk's side of this you are literally saying that @cheetah should be downvoted every time he pounces. Because he is advocating that all bots avoid human conversations unless specifically asked. This actually effects you and other bots that might come online seeking to provide similar services. For instance I'm building a catfishin bot.
All I'm doing with the STEEMBOTS leash codes is asking other botmakers to respect leash codes when appropriate. I can't force anyone and if you don't have a leash code in your posting you can't expect them to just know that your topic is off limits to them.
By the by, maybe the leash code could be built intothe site interface, same way as post auto upvote is, or something? That way people would only have totoggle it once and forget. With @dantheman discussing how whales & dolphins are all about using bots to moderate steemit, it is quite feasible solution. Since it is your initiative, maybe you can suggest that, or something?
@pfunk I noticed that you appear to have accidentally flagged the topic as spam, abuse or a copyright violation. Can you please unflag it? Obviously it is none of the above whether you disagree with the premise or not. Thanks!
I think your idea is bad and should not be rewarded. That is why I downvoted your post. My downvote doesn't hurt your rewards that much, but as a stakeholder of Steem I do not want to see its rewards going to bad ideas that will have a negative impact on the value of Steem and Steemit. The concept was changed to flagging only recently, and abuse is not its only use.
So you have no problem with people flagging you if they disagree then?
Interesting.
Ok going back to the topic. Let's simplify. What is better, an establish and organized ruleset under which bots operate. Or allowing them to flood in willy nilly until you can't get a word in without some one liner or meme bot interjecting?
@pfunk I'm not programming the bots. We're giving instructions and tools away and encouraging ethical behavior by financially rewarding builders who do a good job.
The builders have the option to do as they please.
There will be a registry of anyone who has access to our tools and what bots are using the platform.
The code of conduct will state to keep your bot out of posted areas. #STEEMBOTSTAY is how you notify them. I don't have anything else to offer you in this regard. But I guess you can try contacting each bot's owner one by one and asking them to blacklist you manually. They aren't mine. I tried to bring them and their owners here, but you're flagging these conversations instead of upvoting what should be a very important and visible topic.
If you want your buy in on the code of conduct to count then join us and participate. You can be an important voice if you choose to be.
My philosophy on my actions taken on Steem and Steemit is that whatever they are, the actions should be meant to increase the value of both. In this case, downvoting you for presenting an idea that I believe would lower the value of Steemit and thus my stake in Steem is a rational action in line with the philosophy of maximizing value.
In other words, I believe Steem should not be paying the users who seek to lower its value, whether they do it intentionally or not. As a moderate stakeholder in Steem as a whole, I have a voice (albeit smaller than many) in where the rewards go. And I'll use a downvote when I see it to be valuable to Steem as a whole.
RE: Ruleset. Opt-in, period. No automatic, unprompted posts like we see the bots in #introduceyourself and sometimes everywhere.