So one can get less interaction and still drain the rewards pool. Somehow I don't like the idea of having a bot do the curation for you. This just kills the social element in the platform and is fucking up the whole idea of curation and rewarding quality posts, thus lowering even further the value of Steem.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Yeah, you're kind of right about that. But you have to admit that, like everywhere, it depends on how you use it.
Many new users on steemit provide excellent content, but just don't get bigger. For these people my platform can really help to get a boost in the beginning. And instead of spending on theese curation bots (which actually do the same, but taking money for it), they can use this platform for free.
Is Steem a market for votes or a social platform? That's all I'm asking. The rewards distribution is broken, because people are gaming the rewards. This is the reason why the best authors will never make it on Steem, they need to pay for attention. Bots care only about profits.
This is the loopwhole of the design of Steemit which has not consider the human nature at the very beginning.
Looking at the way @ned and his buddies are taking away money from the plafom, I think they considered human nature reall good. We gave Steemit too much trust, that they neve deserved. Go and buy votes, but when you spend all your Steem on bots and have zero interaction with real people, ask yourself is Steem a social media or a market for votes?
you are right. Not much interaction here.