You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: NOTICE!!! GAMES SUSPENDED UNTIL @SadKitten Stops Flagging Us
Hi @braaiboy, actually the threshold for flagging was set too low this time, you have been removed in any case. You are still a pretty high ROI self voter compared with all accounts on the platform, but not high enough to meet our flagging targets.
Hi @personz, Thanks for getting back to me, and thanks for removing @playdice from the list... even if it is not for the reasons that it should actually be excluded from the downvotes.
Please reach out to me on discord
#BraaiBoy4913so that we can agree on something more final and permanent.I didn't remove @playdice from the list on your request, it was removed before I even read your posts, there were just a few hours where the list wasn't cut short enough which was my mistake. @playdice was still within the top 100 most optimal self voters.
I'm happy to talk here, what else do you want to discuss?
Hi @personz,
Nobody said you removed it at my request... In fact I think I said the opposite.
What I'm trying to do is start a dialogue where you will consider actually removing @playdice on purpose because the self-votes that you and your bot deem "bad" are in this instance not, and worthy of an exception. Is this something that you are willing to look into?
There is no point trying to reason with these guys, they think self voting 100s of dollars a day is acceptable and self voting 2 cents a day is a flaggable offence, according to some very poorly thought out utopian idea based on a percentage algo.
They are harming steemit because minnows have a tendancy to vote with a higher percentage because they have less money.
They are indirectly attacking new steemians / minnows.
As long as Steem is a stake based blockchain then relative behavior is the best metric. If minnows want high absolute self voted rewards (still a very cynical attitude) then they should buy more STEEM and power it up. It's called "skin in the game".
Most minnows come here to "EARN" some STEEM. They don't have any money to power up! This is what attracts most people, like it says on the homepage ~ "Your voice is worth something ~ Get paid for good content".
Relative behaviour is not the best metric if you do not consider how it will affect new Steemians to a higher percentage (New Steemians are the future of Steemit, without them it will fail).
Why not put a "age of account less than 1 year = not included in @sadkitten algo "
By doing this you will give minnows a chance to make some money first & learn your laws/rules.
"Get paid for good content" is not the same as "Pay yourself for good content". The tag line implies that it is by garnering the interest of others that you get paid, just like how it works literally everywhere.
You're also forgetting that minnow accounts are used in farming scams, and new accounts are being created every hour to scam. So it doesn't make any sense to only look at accounts that are at least a year old.
Again, all anyone has to do is not self vote their account all the time, very frequently. Simple. Do you realize how few accounts we actually flag? Compared with the entire ecosystem it's a fraction of a fraction. It's clear that this is just personal for you rather than looking out for any minnows.
It's not personal i have lost more Steem (using bid-bots) than i have earned here! and my self vote percentage is 5%. I'm currently considering to leave or fight because of the new law bots and the dust cap rule.
It is very tough to attract people to vote for you (unless you like brown nosing and circle jerking ~ i don't like doing that, i assume many people have the same view).
I want Steemit to thrive and create a new way for people to earn a living, looking at most of my followers i guess they have a real world income of less than 10 dollars a day, many are on less than $2 a day.
If you and the other developers stopped making it harder to earn Steem (and focused on making it easier), people would be joining Steemit by the Millions, the word will spread so fast you cannot possibly imagine.
I personally cannot recommend Steemit to anyone at the moment because it is so hard to make a few pennies (even with good content).
Self voting and creating less than $1 a day is not hurting Steemit, these are the people that will tell there friends on how to create a little cheeky cash. Billions of low income earners could benefit. ~ $1-2 a day to them is a decent wage, or good supplement.
To be safe on here because of your bot you now need to get a self vote percentage i'm guessing to below 90%...
....In time if your bot is successful that percentage will be lower, perhaps 5% ~ this means that you would have won and Steemit has died, because most new Steemians left & no new people arrived.
I hope i'm wrong & everyone magically starts voting for others and everyone is satisfied, but you must admit it's a bit of a gamble to attack new users into changing there habits?
We don't make exceptions. It's the only way to achieve fairness.
Hi @personz,
We're gonna have to agree to disagree. I fail to see how taking rewards away random Steemians is in any way "fair".