Partially. I am working on a monthly summary with the top abusers of bid bots. It will show the totals they received in bidbot payouts and the number of posts they "promoted"
There is no means to add an unfollow or mute directly in steemit. But perhaps someday I will add this functionality on one of my servers. It is pretty complex since it involves user permissions and individual settings and configurations.
But who knows, we'll see which way the wind blows.
There has to be a way to do it. Hopefully someone will see this conversation and tell us how. When I go to someone's blog page, my browser displays a MUTE button. It's just HTML. I'll try to find some time to look into this myself, too.
The follow and mute buttons are not actually links, they are javascript commands. If you right click on them you will not see a "open this link", whereas you do if you right click on the search button.
It is possible it can be done, but would take some investigating.
You might be interested in this tool.
https://steemwhales.com/clean-trending/
Your initiative might just lead to greater things. We might be onto something here; a group of users who take control over their feeds and who aggressively use muting (facilitated to make it easy and automatic) to nuke the selfish people here effectively out of existence.
Keep doing what you're doing. I'm not much of a web developer but I'll do what I can to help put this together. Counterattack!
I believe it is a very solid plan that could easily gain a real movement due to the total frustration of the average Steemian who is watching the rewards pool raped daily by those who so short sited they actually feel it is good for the platform to take money from everyone else, since their article is quality.
IMO flagging people is the wrong approach, and I especially don't want to flag people using a list put together by someone else. 100% human curation also means 100% human flagging. IMO flagging should ONLY be used on a spam post; never to attack a person no matter how evil the person seems to be. (Some people here already see ME to be evil!)
The way to deal with selfish people is to MUTE them. Nuke them out of your own universe without harming them at all.
I fully agree with you. Tranparencybot does not downvote and never will. I do downvote hate speach, profane, cruel, unproperly tagged or other abuses. This I do manually as you suggest and generally let the authors know why.
Flagging is useful, when used properly. iflagshit would not have been silenced by a mute button.
I'd love to try to persuade you to stop censoring hate speech. Many people have perceived my "street essay" speech to be "hate speech". Hate speech is fully protected in the United States, and for good reason. Were it not so, I would never have been able to speak, and I would be in prison right now and possibly dead. (My speech is not hate speech; it is simply speech expressing prohibited viewpoints on prohibited topics.)
There is absolutely no need to censor hate speech, no matter how vile, even on the street where it cannot be muted. By censoring hate speech, you are expressing your contempt for whatever group you think needs you to protect their "safe space". Here on steemit, anyone who wants to live in a filter bubble can easily do so by muting anyone who says anything unpleasant. They don't need you to censor what is available for others to hear.
@iflagshit was spamming as I define the term (to mean any behavior that silences others by degrading the platform).
It has to very cruel or personal (not against me, I just ignore them), for me to flag hate speech, but I do have a limit. I'm sure you may have seen some of the lewd, distasteful and utterly profane remarks launched at me the first couple of days the bot went online. I don't believe I downvoted any of them (at least not for that reason)-- I simply ignore it.
But again, I have a line and will defend others; more so than myself, when someone crosses it and becomes belligerently intolerable.
One of the problems with muting, for any reason, is that you will begin missing parts of a discussion that may have much importance to you. Muted users do not show up in your replies and are filtered out in the conversation that you may be taking part in with others, so this has to be taken into consideration.
Even if a comment is extremely vile and personal, I urge you to presume that the targeted person is a good, strong man or woman who can handle it without your assistance. Post your own condemnation of the hate speech, in order to rebuke the hater and also express solidarity and moral support for the targeted person.
It might seem insensitive for me to say this, but any person who participates in a speech forum has a duty to be strong enough to handle ANY speech directed against him. Censorship is so dangerous and so harmful to discourse that personal strength is the ante that you must put onto the table in order to sit down and be dealt cards.
Your point about muting is well taken. I really don't see any alternative. I'm probably going to start blogging to develop a consensus document that will state recommended policies for users who, like me, have limited time and are here seeking relationships with others.