Take steps to improve perception of Steem, such as by making use of the ninja mined steem held in @steemit that annoys the crypto world so much (such as perhaps using it to tackle bid bots as I mentioned in this recent post).
Most of the major stakeholders are against Steemit using their stake to upvote/downvote content.
If they create their own bid bot that undercuts the competition and which returns the money taken in for the bots into the reward pool, it solves a variety of problems in one go:
It would not be Steemit Inc's choice as to which content gets voted for or against - so I don't really know where the complaints would come from - except from owners of bidbots.
That is quite debatable. Most would spin it as Steemit is using their stake to counteract the wishes of the stakeholders.
It is a complex issue, yes - certainly open to debate.
If the market of steem users buys the votes from Steemit, then it can be said that 'the market has spoken' and the userbase has no problem with it. I'm not sure who exactly you are referring to, but I don't see the big SP holders flagging bot users very often (ever) and I am pretty sure they are not beyond using bots themselves. The key issue though, here, for me - is that the bot owners will be continually growing their SP forever - meaning that if they aren't already, it won't take long before they ARE the major stakeholders and obviously they are going to be against Steemit Inc. doing anything to put them out of business. So it is that there is a kind of face-off .. The community and Steemit must decide if they think that potentially being held to ransom by bot owners and their friends is better than having them leave in a huff and having to then bring in more investors with a cleaner, more balanced platform.
Something in me suggests thinking of women breaking free from pimps! ;)
A large number of the large stakeholders are against Steemit using their stake for voting - regardless of how 'good' or 'bad' the intent. Even though it is a good idea, it is pretty much a no-go.
I just made a new post that expands on this idea and adds in the element that the money used to buy the votes goes straight back into the rewards pool. I think this should negate any complaint about rewards pool dilution, leaving any complaint form stakeholders lacking substance.. Unless I am missing something (which is certainly possible!).
https://steemit.com/steem/@ura-soul/a-way-to-neutralise-bid-bots-on-steemit-steem-while-still-allowing-votes-to-be-bought
Again, good idea, but a no-go. Stakeholders are against it.
Of course they are, because Steemit declining rewards inflates the value of their own stake. That doesn't mean Steemit is required to listen to them.
I don't think using it to go to war with bots or anyone else is a good plan, but they could delegate it in chunks to curation initiatives, or follow @hr1's vote, or something.