I don't understand why bots are even allowed here. All the major social media platforms outright forbid botting views and upvotes and yet here, where your earnings are even more bound to the post visibility the practice is tolerated and bots thrive. It makes no sense - there is a reason why these mechanics are not allowed even on platforms where you can't monetize your content. It puts small and new content creators in a significant disadvantage. The problem is even bigger here because there are now actors known for botting so their followers save the votes for creators that are bound to bring larger curation rewards due to botting.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
There is no central authority to control bots.
Twitter allows bots, same with instagram. Facebook, while does explicitly allow them provides an API that you can make a bot with as well. Name a single social media that actively deter bots? If there is an API given then people will make internal bots, without an API then they will just use a library that allows for the interaction with HTML elements... The point is that it is effectively impossible to stop bots without adding in consistent and unique items like google captcha or other randomized bot deterrents and even those aren't perfect deterrents.
It's probably the same reason Steam is such a pile of shit compared to other game-selling platforms with actual customer service and human employee interaction. Just like how Valve doesn't want to actually hire anyone, Stinc also probably wants to save money on employees that could help make the website and user experience way better.
Also, there is an argument for bots and trails and automated everything to be allowed for the sake of giving investors a chance to passively earn ROI, which is an attractive feature to many and necessary if all the competitors are easier to earn passively with.