That's because the vote bots don't even read or look at the content, and that is my issue with them. How could they up-vote something, which in turn gives it credit and recognition as being a quality piece of content, when they haven't even fucking read it?
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Yes, that is it, bots can't even read, as dumb as that sounds it does enable us to spot posts that are heavily bot up-voted.
Keeping in mind that there are possibly also non public bots being used by whale groups financing themselves with cleaverly disguised posts as mention.
Without a doubt, hence the reason why the rich keep getting richer on here, with little to no effort whatsoever.
There's certainly some weird goings on, here's a screen capture from an officialfuzzy competition. Notice the views 52 and votes 136 he runs very frequent community challenge comps to produce art work, videos, tweets anything... all in the spirit of community building, prizes are always bts tokens, I've never seen steem offered, participated in a few of them myself and found him making some strong critisims of @ned and steemit on Telegram chat yesterday.
That's what bot action looks like my friend... pretty sad ain't it?
Yep, It looks very much like the ratio of votes is screwed by bots. curators are likely not being rewarded for their content least not on the level they could in the absense of bots.
I 100% agree, but I do not see the bots going away anytime soon, but hopefully as more real people join... they will be able to drowned out the bots.
I think so, the incentive system, rewards for curation and participation also called the attention ecconony by other platform developers is interest. Was listening to a talk by Sam Kazemian, CEO of everipedia earlier, think he described it as being as complex as designing blockchain delegation and voting, something along those lines anyway.