For one, something needs to be done about people who have hundreds of fake accounts for self-upvotes. Another would be some kind of mechanism to prevent the abuse of the flagging feature.
No platform can exist without some kind of RULES to prevent this sort of... unpleasantness. You can't just write in the dialog what flagging is for, then be okay with it when bullies and scammers simply ignore it, and use the feature to silence opinions. People with hundreds of fake profiles are abusing the system and using their scam-earned money to ensure only what THEY support and agree with has visibility. I would very much like to see this change. Wouldn't you?
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Why? They have the same effect as a single upvote if all of those accounts' stake were in one account. Whether it is 1 upvote or a thousand, the effect is the same.
Abuse according to whom? What sort of mechanism?
bots created through Steemit acquire delegated stake, and therefore, when used to vote for the swarm controllers posts, scam Steem.
You know this. Clearly, you're using the Aristotelian dialog to demonstrate that @techslut already knows the answers to her questions.
While that would be effective, if condescending, if discussing something like mathematics, which you could have undeniably correct answers to, Steemit isn't mathematics, it's a social media platform, and therefore involves people, slightly more complex than algebra.
For example, your reply ignored botnets scamming the rewards pool. It also ignores that each alt used to post eventually acquires rep, which doesn't stack like SP, and constitutes a separate attack vector when such alts are used to flag, causing additional impact of such attack on rep, unlike a single account flagging.
Given your position, I find your coy questions less than substantive, particularly when you're insinuating half truths.
Not exactly the same effect. For me, as a user, a post with 100 upvotes is not a post with 1 upvote. How else can I tell if content is worth reading? The payout? Hardly. The game is rigged in favor of whoever finds a smarter way to abuse the system. That's more than obvious at this point.
I thought the idea of flagging was to prevent plagiarism, hate speech and spam from getting visibility on steemit. Sounded logical to me.
Apparently, that's not what it's for and I was silly to assume it was.
The flagging feature is a weapon for the strong to use against the weak. Like I said, you might as well change the dialog text, to avoid confusion. Some people might actually believe flagging is used to reduce the visibility of spam or hate speech, rather than bully people and silence opinions.
There is no way to prevent any user from having multiple accounts on any decentralized, permissionless system.
Yes there is. There are more than one, in fact. People who make accounts through Steemit to get the delegated SP, so they can vote, provide a phone number, and those that do this to create botnets use fake, temporary numbers.
2FA ends both creating accounts this way, and having more bots than you have phones.
Anothe mechanism, which I personally detest, is captchas, at least a temporary fix, until AI gets smart enough to beat them.
You're smarter than me, and can prolly come up with even more.
Then how do you propose to deal with one bully with lots of power hurting the whole community? Because now that he's done with me, he's targeting utopian-io.
Actually, you’re wrong because he can have a normal conversation unlike some random (self-proclaimed) slut. GFY - flagging you at -5% is no skin off my back.
I'm not sure what power you think he has, beyond the ability to inflate the vote count numbers, which is the same power that anyone has (anyone can create as many accounts as they wish).
You're seriously implying that trashing someones rep, and attacking their rewards, doesn't even exist?
That's ridiculous, and insuperable. Perhaps you could enlighten me, if I've misunderstood your coment.