If I am reading your comment correctly, I would love that and I would support you guys for doing that. I am opposed to plagarism, identity deception/theft and scams, what I have a problem with is going after people that repeat themselves for the sake of exposure. I simply see nothing wrong with that and believe that Steem, as a decentralized blogging platform should allow that stuff to exist. If a blogger hates spam comments on their personal blog they should flag it themselves. We don't need an internet police force for that kind of thing.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Vast majority of users are not capable of recognizing that such comments are spam. They are completely clueless and/or don't do basic due diligence by checking someone's blog. You realize that when you see them responding to these spam comments thinking that they are honest and crafted just for them showing real interest in what they post.
These spam comments are manufactared to fish for potential votes from such oblivious users.
The problem is that spam posts simply spam the Blockchain.
More importantly, it drowns the visibility of posts created by decent content creators.
Would you like your post that you put effort in creating quickly disappearing and becoming invisible because of it being pushed away and drowned between mass of spam posts?
Sadly, majority of posts published each day are some sort of abuse like plagiarism, copypasta and/or spam attempting to farm/fish on curated and/or popular tags.
Also, these posts seldom have "decline payout" option selected, meaning that they are attempt to fish for random vote.
How does it bring value to Steemit and recognition from outside, if any new outsider who tries to check up what Steemit is about just see trash, spam and exploitation posts everywhere?
That sounds like it is not a problem then. If the author of the post does not have a problem with the comment on their post, I see no reason we need a third party to act as an authoritarian on the issue.
That was dealt with by RCs. Again, you are creating an authoritarian state on a supposedly decentralized protocol and making rules for users that you do not follow in your own operations. RCs were meant to manage spam, creating a cost per action. If a person is willing to cover the cost by investing enough in the network they have purchased their right to said actions.
You are forcing your own ideologies about what should or should not exist on a protocol that is suppose to be about freedom of action and expression. This is why the Steem experiment has revealed that unlimited stake weight is a bad idea. Unlimited influence over the network by a single entity leads to centralization and authoritarianism.
I thought, perhaps mistakenly, that your earlier comment was suggesting you would be relieved to not have to bother with "spam" comments. It now seems that it was a bluff because you assumed I cared that you did that job... I don't. However, I support you in hunting down scams and obvious and proven plagiarists. (read: not just people that don't check in with you, which happened to @jsecoin's original content)
No idea what you are talking about.
Please read Steemit's FAQ, section about spam and plagiarism.
Also please read our articles' collection in "informationalarticles" channel in our Discord.
And what about @burnpost, would it be punishable under the spam policies? What's up with not doing anything about that spam? It has even gone on Trending...
Steemit has the right to do with their website whatever they want, however, they have no right of authority over the blockchain. If it is a decentralized blockchain great, otherwise, the SEC might find it interesting how much control Steemit seems to exercise over the blockchain. None of us want that, so please let Steem be what it was suppose to be and stop policing it.
The SEC checks into projects and if they deem Steemit to have more control over the blockchain than a business should have over a decentralized protocol, we're all screwed.