I will be very respectful now, because you show me respect..
Sir/Ma'am, to my knowledge there is no more nor any less garbage on posts promoted by any single bot - to prove so in any case would be a monumental task because one has to decide on what is 'garbage'. This is a decentralized system meaning that you or I and everyone else gets to decide individually without targeting anyone based on which bot they use or what content they produce, or what comments they flagged.. the flag isn't a punishment for anything except something directly related to the post itself. Targeting all people who have a green icon or all people who have used bot-x is simply unreasonable and unfair. Your assumption (that sneaky-ninja posts are all garbage) is with good intention, but without any support in evidence. On this question of defining 'garbage'. If you can say you read my post and found it objectionable, or without value, i can not object.
AFAIK @sneaky-ninja makes a decided effort to control the quality of posts - he/she has a blacklist as well which is updated regularly and transparently so. Others do as well, and other do not.
As to who pays you:
You get a free pass, sir/ma'am - you get to post duplicate comments and upvote them yourself.. several in a day. this is profitable for you. Also, you victimize people who are posting good content or bad content, in the same way. Your 'campaign' sir, I think, is misguided but it has amounted to everyone except @the-resistance standing up and saying 'no more spam comments - we downvote the comment so you don't get the payment'. Now, we are within our rights because your comment is spam: it doesn't related to the content of the post at all. I also have reservations flagging your comment anyway, because sometimes your comment appears below junk content.. but once again, the comment is not related and I believe you haven't read the post. If someone else leaves spam, i flag it too. One time @themarkymark came and flagged an unrelated post of mine because I flagged his spam left by a bot. I agree with what you and he may be trying to do, but I believe your common method of flag abuse, is essentially wrong, with all respect to your best intentions.
Mark does not upvote his own comments and he also runs a manual effort to scan things - i am sure he also reviews his decisions. Of course, these are great things too. In that regard, he is doing exactly what all of us ought to be doing - curating responsibly.
Furthermore, I'd gladly support your campaigns if you used a method to scan the content - there are ways to do this I am convinced, and the methods can be a great improvement on methods that are already being deployed on the platform. It can be a community effort. But I do believe your current method is a bit like throwing the baby out with the bathwater - you dispense altogether with quality ratings or blacklists and go with a broad generalization. If someone gets paid out once on bad content, the next time he tries to pay a bid-bot he can no longer do it. This is way better than preventing him from paying to promote until 6 days - because others can promote until 6 days by self-upvoting. I hope you see my argument point and if I am in error, we can certainly talk. Now I have my day job duties to fulfill, so best regards.
I will be very respectful now, because you show me respect..
Sir/Ma'am, to my knowledge there is no more nor any less garbage on posts promoted by any single bot - to prove so in any case would be a monumental task because one has to decide on what is 'garbage'. This is a decentralized system meaning that you or I and everyone else gets to decide individually without targeting anyone based on which bot they use or what content they produce, or what comments they flagged.. the flag isn't a punishment for anything except something directly related to the post itself. Targeting all people who have a green icon or all people who have used bot-x is simply unreasonable and unfair. Your assumption (that sneaky-ninja posts are all garbage) is with good intention, but without any support in evidence. On this question of defining 'garbage'. If you can say you read my post and found it objectionable, or without value, i can not object.
AFAIK @sneaky-ninja makes a decided effort to control the quality of posts - he/she has a blacklist as well which is updated regularly and transparently so. Others do as well, and other do not.
As to who pays you:
You get a free pass, sir/ma'am - you get to post duplicate comments and upvote them yourself.. several in a day. this is profitable for you. Also, you victimize people who are posting good content or bad content, in the same way. Your 'campaign' sir, I think, is misguided but it has amounted to everyone except @the-resistance standing up and saying 'no more spam comments - we downvote the comment so you don't get the payment'. Now, we are within our rights because your comment is spam: it doesn't related to the content of the post at all. I also have reservations flagging your comment anyway, because sometimes your comment appears below junk content.. but once again, the comment is not related and I believe you haven't read the post. If someone else leaves spam, i flag it too. One time @themarkymark came and flagged an unrelated post of mine because I flagged his spam left by a bot. I agree with what you and he may be trying to do, but I believe your common method of flag abuse, is essentially wrong, with all respect to your best intentions.
Mark does not upvote his own comments and he also runs a manual effort to scan things - i am sure he also reviews his decisions. Of course, these are great things too. In that regard, he is doing exactly what all of us ought to be doing - curating responsibly.
thomas aka. bushgrad
Furthermore, I'd gladly support your campaigns if you used a method to scan the content - there are ways to do this I am convinced, and the methods can be a great improvement on methods that are already being deployed on the platform. It can be a community effort. But I do believe your current method is a bit like throwing the baby out with the bathwater - you dispense altogether with quality ratings or blacklists and go with a broad generalization. If someone gets paid out once on bad content, the next time he tries to pay a bid-bot he can no longer do it. This is way better than preventing him from paying to promote until 6 days - because others can promote until 6 days by self-upvoting. I hope you see my argument point and if I am in error, we can certainly talk. Now I have my day job duties to fulfill, so best regards.
How about you start blogging, make reports and attract some audience to upvote (pay you) like everyone else does?