The solution is already coded into the platform.
It can be implemented by simply changing the payout option on the post.
Nobody wants ads on Steem, we decline payments to achieve that now.
But, the crapitalusts have circumvented our sacrifice by selling the commons to the highest bidders.
Sure it's their stake, but nobody likes getting kicked in the shins day after day, do they?
They tell us that folks are just buying ad space, but they advertise their services as profitable.
I have two newbs chastizing me because they are making profits at the game, but I refuse to join in on the rape.
So, clearly the vote sellers are giving out profits from their votes.
The sellers are not being honest in that regard.
If they were their business model would collapse.
Well, all the controversy can be removed from this issue by simply declining rewards.
The true cost of advertising on Steem would be found.
Rather than the sellers raping our commons for profit, we all benefit.
The rewards are not removed from all of our votes.
They remain in the pool.
The sellers still get paid, but a fraction of what they make now.
This slows the inevitable domination of the platform by the crapitalusts that put profits over people.
This will compensate every author for being bombarded by ads nobody wants to see.
It makes ads more painful for the buyer, but we don't want them here at all.
I can't make this happen alone.
If you like this idea, tell somebody, eh?
They probably haven't considered the option.
lol I think I have a clue where you are coming from but yeah. The pilgrims tried working for free. They had to abandon that communist anarchy so they didn't all die.
Well, if you reckon talking to folks on social media is work, I'd just as soon you didn't bother talking to me. I'm not interested in your pitch, most like.
People are making posting on social media a for profit venture, and discussing the issues of the day is what social media is for, IMHO. I reckon @freebornangel is competely right about this solving the rewards pool rape problem--if people would do it.
I expect they won't. Because they're just after money, not engagement, despite what they say they are after. Throughout history we have examples of commons being exploited commercially and the end result has always been the destruction of the commons. From the pastures of England, to the Passenger Pigeon, and now the Rewards Pool, commercial exploitation of public commons inevitably destroys the commons.
Therefore commercial exploitation of Steemit should not be able to access the rewards pool.
The pilgrims didnt have robots to do the work for them, now did they?
We couldve all been leisure class citizens by now but the crapitalusts dont give anything for free and starving unemployed workers sack the castles.
You can use robots to create wealth and you can use robots to destroy wealth.
We have a lot of leisure class sheeple that cash in on welfare while others pay them not to work.
Nobody ive known cashed in on welfare, subsisted, maybe, but nobody got rich.
Think you can make it on $189 of food per month?
Crapitalism sucks, always has always will, unless you are on top.
$189 would definitely cover my food budget. A lot of people get free food and free cellphones plus some housing assistance plus free healthcare so it works out pretty well for them.
Yeah, some do.
If you werent soo inculcated with crapitalust propaganda you would know that it is profits, ie unpayed wages, that create this situation in the first place.
Ive got a post ready that illustrates this from 1915, but this tablet doesnt render the pics well enough.
I cant really stress enough the need to seek information from outside the matrix designed to make it impossible for you to even conceive of freedom.
Unless you are willing to look outside your box you will never change economics any more than folks change religions, and for the same reasons.
Your impressionable mind was molded, its unusual for folks to break their molds before circumstances force it.
Before you try to wax poetic about poverty,you should try some.
Maybe talk to a few like Woody Guthrie, Will Rogers, Ricardo Magon, or Bhagat Singh.
Well, they can still talk to you through their writings.
They are available for free, if you invest the time to expand your horizons a little.
Have you ever seen socialist reality with your own eyes? I support profits.
Have you ever studied history and what capitalism did for countries like the USA?
Am I a newb?
Whatever profit I made, I paid for it dearly with time, worries, risks, stress, realizations of risks and lost opportunities.
I even got downvoted more than once by haters, jealous people whom would deny their jealousy in words, but expose it either by words, or actions, or both.
There is even some good in their downvotes:
It exposes them, angers them and wastes their VP, while I keep doing my thing.
I do not do what I do only for profits (as a hint for this claim, I do not eat ass), I also enjoy it at times, learn new things, know new people, both good, bad and near the middle of the scale and gather some experiences, good, bad and interesting which you spare yourself from.
And I repeat, the reward pool was created to be used, it gets filled and it draws people to this place.
It is a good idea.
The spammers, scammers and shitposters should be fought, not the usage itself.
One way to fight them, is to compete, another is to downvote.
You choose to do neither and I do both.
..
..
And you did not decline rewards in this (very) post of yours.
I didnt buy any of those rewards, either.
Relatively?
Im sure, but it still violates the premise of rewards being distributed by the community voluntarily for content they find valuable.
Better check your data source again.
I had to apologize just yesterday for flagging plagairism that proved to be a format issue.
I put out posts and comment nearly nonstop, i just dont pay for rewards.
Its like paying for prostitution, or taking a bath with your socks on.
Your feet get clean, but it dont feel right.
You got to do what you do, and that is ok, for you.
@youtake pulls you up ! This vote was sent to you by @stimialiti!
You got a 100.00% upvote from @allaz courtesy of @stimialiti!
Steem Upvote Bot Tracker
introduceyourself. He is going to hold interesting contests with cash prizes and promises to tell a lot of interesting stories!Thanks for using Bid Voting Bot @allaz service and I want to introduce you to my new friend @monsterbit in order to give additional thanks! Do you know who is @monsterbit is? My friend, you can miss a lot. I highly recommend checking him with
I don't really understand. I want to try and make an upvote bot mostly because my content selection preference can be automated so I can contribute much more to steem this way. I honestly cannot be here every day and sometimes miss weeks of steemit posts.
So, make an upvote bot.
I use two different ones.
Vote selling bots are different.
Upvote bots support authors you have chosen to support, vote selling bots support only those that pay.
It is better if you manually curate, but the content discovery tools here suck.
I use upvote bots to populate a reading list.
You probably shouldnt upvote your own comments, it shows a lack of class if you have over 500sp.
Ive made more upvoting my own posts than ive been paid for many of my articles. The only class i see is self reliance. Ill always vote for myself. Thanks for your reply and insights.
Well, you got to work hard to get folks to vote your posts.
Alot of folks here wont vote on self voters.
You are wasting your vote power voting your own comments, if you dont get a following vote of at least .02, they just round down.
Well, I agree that posts soliciting paid upvotes should trigger payout declined code. Don't expect Steemit or the witnesses to agree, and I'm not sure how you could be sure to get all the votebots to comply to some kind of registration scheme.
Some would seek to avoid the payout declined code. I am utterly confident folks currently paying for upvotes would almost to a person refuse to decline payout. They want the money.
I think there's a kernel of a great idea here though, and I'll think on it more.
Thanks!
The comunity will have to work together.
'Sure you can buy some rewards, but you will never get another vote any other way. Feel free.'
We will have to downvote the worst of them.@grumpycat seems to be doing alright.
Id prefer the community learn to work together rather than beg the overlords to undo what they created in the first place.
We are here because this is what stinc wanted, its silly to beg them to admit they were wrong.
That's pretty much the way I see it.
I also strongly advocate moderate delegations, for no more rent than the curation rewards they produce, as I've seen how powerfully this disperses rewards.
Again, however, the whales would have to eschew the higher ROI immediately available from delegation rentals, or selfvotes, and I don't see it happening because of their preference for cash over capital gains potential.
I, like you, don't buy votes. The very concept of buying votes renders voting meaningless.
Thanks!
At first glance, this is not a practical idea.
At second glance, however, this is not a practical idea.
At third reading, this is still a totally unworkable idea. It requires the users who are being robbed to sit back and wait for the robbers to grow weary of the robbing and finally stop! That is NOT "power to the people". It is expecting passivity to the sheep.
Not going to happen, IMHO.
And the part about flagging the worst abusers?
That will be most helpful. Depending on users to give up rewards while the robbers co tinue to rake them in will be fruitless. Shining light on the offenders will increase awareness, but will have no other effect since there is no penalty for them.
Nope, no remedy.
They arranged these things knowingly.
They are following their plan.
Amazing