If you elect to opt out of the comment, then transparencybot reserves the right to downvote you post for disagreement with rewards.
Craig, you are a relentless bully. Yes, you reserve the right with transparency bot to flag people who opt out of your bot. And the community reserves the right to continue flagging you for being unwilling to come to the table for weeks and discuss the opt out option. Pretty sure you remember my comments regarding that specifically over and over again.
Personally, I hope @booster and @fyrstikken follows through and flags you down to -50. Go start a new project is my advice. Something with actual community value. If you wanted to point out the absolute obvious then you should fire up @obviousbot or @repetitiveinfoachildcouldfindbot
Good luck getting your rep above 0 Maybe you buy some booster votes.
This is interesting. Do think think anyone will not opt out? I think the more proper solution is that you require everyone who uses voting bots to put at the end of their posts, "This is a paid advertisement. This post is not endorsed by the community." If they don't do that, you continue to offer your information/warning.
yeah, it's a hard line to walk, but vote buying is clearly advertising which should put the post in the promotion tab. The trending tab is for posts found valuable by the community, which posts that make it there by being voted by voting bots clearly are not. Posts may be both advertising and found to be valuable, but there is probably a metric that can be analyzed to determine if it is one and not the other. I guess at the dollar mark that causes the post to be on the trending page maybe determine the percentage of author reward that can be attributed to voting bots and consider it as not community supported if the majority is voting bots. Remove your post if the tide swings the other way. This type of thing needs some tweaking, but aside from a major upheaval like SMT proof of brain authentication being the only way for a post to get on the trending page, I'm not sure what else there is. Just an idea...
I really like the fact that you are going to use an opt out for your bot! I just have one question.
You stated, even in the comments you leave on posts that its by no means an attack to the post nor quality for said post. Now I read this from you...
If you elect to opt out of the comment, then transparencybot reserves the right to downvote you post for disagreement with rewards.
Is that you saying that you do disagree with the payouts on posts you leave the reply? Because to me that sounds like, Hey if you opt out on my comments I am going to flag you!
I am glad you are going to do the flag after manual curation. And by all means I am not saying that you are not free to use a flag how you see it fit.
What I am after is your reasoning for doing this project. Mostly because of the way you word things like in this post.
After reading it twice it made me feel like you are now giving people the choice to either accept your comments or to get flagged instead of the option opt out/never hear from again or accept my comments on your posts!
I believe that a good discussion is never wrong as long as both parties are willing to see the other persons sight.
You could maybe kill the transparency bot and do a new bot where people could request info. A lot of bidders are losing money on bots and might like to know how they did and some users might like info on a post.
Personally if I use a lot of bots on a post I can lose track of how well I did.
It seems to me a very interesting good idea to avoid that the accounts are worked alone by bot at the end of each post place that would be good excellent work friend greetings congratulations
Craig, you are a relentless bully. Yes, you reserve the right with transparency bot to flag people who opt out of your bot. And the community reserves the right to continue flagging you for being unwilling to come to the table for weeks and discuss the opt out option. Pretty sure you remember my comments regarding that specifically over and over again.
Personally, I hope @booster and @fyrstikken follows through and flags you down to -50. Go start a new project is my advice. Something with actual community value. If you wanted to point out the absolute obvious then you should fire up @obviousbot or @repetitiveinfoachildcouldfindbot
Good luck getting your rep above 0 Maybe you buy some booster votes.
This is interesting. Do think think anyone will not opt out? I think the more proper solution is that you require everyone who uses voting bots to put at the end of their posts, "This is a paid advertisement. This post is not endorsed by the community." If they don't do that, you continue to offer your information/warning.
yeah, it's a hard line to walk, but vote buying is clearly advertising which should put the post in the promotion tab. The trending tab is for posts found valuable by the community, which posts that make it there by being voted by voting bots clearly are not. Posts may be both advertising and found to be valuable, but there is probably a metric that can be analyzed to determine if it is one and not the other. I guess at the dollar mark that causes the post to be on the trending page maybe determine the percentage of author reward that can be attributed to voting bots and consider it as not community supported if the majority is voting bots. Remove your post if the tide swings the other way. This type of thing needs some tweaking, but aside from a major upheaval like SMT proof of brain authentication being the only way for a post to get on the trending page, I'm not sure what else there is. Just an idea...
I really like the fact that you are going to use an opt out for your bot! I just have one question.
You stated, even in the comments you leave on posts that its by no means an attack to the post nor quality for said post. Now I read this from you...
If you elect to opt out of the comment, then transparencybot reserves the right to downvote you post for disagreement with rewards.
Is that you saying that you do disagree with the payouts on posts you leave the reply? Because to me that sounds like, Hey if you opt out on my comments I am going to flag you!
Just wondering while slithering in happiness.
dear @poeticsnake
very useful article
I am glad you are going to do the flag after manual curation. And by all means I am not saying that you are not free to use a flag how you see it fit.
What I am after is your reasoning for doing this project. Mostly because of the way you word things like in this post.
After reading it twice it made me feel like you are now giving people the choice to either accept your comments or to get flagged instead of the option opt out/never hear from again or accept my comments on your posts!
I believe that a good discussion is never wrong as long as both parties are willing to see the other persons sight.
You could maybe kill the transparency bot and do a new bot where people could request info. A lot of bidders are losing money on bots and might like to know how they did and some users might like info on a post.
Personally if I use a lot of bots on a post I can lose track of how well I did.
.
It seems to me a very interesting good idea to avoid that the accounts are worked alone by bot at the end of each post place that would be good excellent work friend greetings congratulations
If you elect to opt out of the comment, then transparencybot reserves the right to downvote your post for disagreement of rewards.
Your 30 cent downvote is really going to hurt. Oh wait you have sockpuppet accounts I forgot. For someone named Transparency, you are anything but.
OPTIN migth be a good idea. Everything else supposed as spam
hi dear friend
how are you?
nice looking article