Damn, the trending page looks particularly shitty today. // I blame Stinc and everyone else.
For whatever reason once im done browsing my feed i look at the crapfest thats the trending page and i have to say that it looks especially shitty today.
Weak opinion pieces that look like theyve been written by a highschooler just to collect some votes...
Crypto good, fiat bad? Omg i had no idea.
... news i couldnt give a damn about, late posts of talked about to death topics and the 3speak folks ive never seen before talking about things i dont care about.
I understand that talent on Steem is underappreciated and lives on the margins. Why? Probably because everyone thats on Steem is here not to consume content (which cannot be done due to the content placement being the way it is) but rather fill up their bags with tokens.
But i can enjoy a good opinion piece as well. That doesnt require much talent or superb skills at all. All you need is a functioning brain.
I enjoy it because it drives engagement. I can enjoy it even if i completely disagree with the opinion in question.
But apparently getting one to trend is impossible if youre not in the "Im a factor on Steem" group and hang out with the right folks".
Lets not make it all about bots. Theres enough blame to go around. I said it a million times and ill say it again.
I despise the content placement algo Steemit has in place.
Its the most lazy poorly thought out system that surprises me even exists now at the brink of internet 3.0.
Biggest vote value, better content placement.
Gosh.. I wonder how that might go wrong.
Ill blame bots for a lot of things but Steemit is just as much to blame for this because they enable vote buying and give bot owners justification to call vote buying: "Promotion".
What if you couldnt buy your way to the top? WHAT IF ENGAGEMENT WAS AN ACTUAL METRIC IN CONTENT PLACEMENT?
God forbid Steemit.inc or any bigger front end for that matter took the step to eliminate this laughably barebones system and came up with a better one. Copy from someone. Copy from twitter out of all things.
If you could no longer buy your way up to the top, vote buying would lose most of its appeal.
This fact is stupidly simple to understand but somehow for whatever reason no one actually does.
Front ends can come up with whatever content placement algo they want. Front ends arent bound by vote values.
Anyways... Trending looks like shit, even more so then usually. I blame everyone for that.
The community that needs to be lead to opinions by "familiar faces" with power like sheep. I blame bots. I blame steemit.inc.
F... All of yall.
flies away 😂
Let me repeat it so its even clearer...
Front ends deal with CONTENT PLACEMENT! Steem deals with TOKEN DISTRIBUTION!
Posted using Partiko Android
When subsidized downvotes become a reality, I would like to see a lot hurt on trending page.
We will see. Id love to see some hurt going on. Some drama and some hard fights.
Posted using Partiko Android
Hence why @anthonyadavisii bumped me into 10 drama token zone.
think steempeak plans to do something, not sure where did i read it. they added suggested users, not sure how well does it work, did not have time to test it.
As long as vote buying is profitable it will keep fooling people with shit excuses about "exposure" and I think that without the exposure, much more scummy people will try their hands at vote buying.
I completely disagree.
Right now you dont have many people attacking overpaid posts. One of the reason is the psychological aspect of bots being seen as a marketing tool.
That is the main justification behind their use.
Most bid bot buys net you a loss. Take away the exposure aspect and what are you left with?
A big payout value post no one sees and you losing money.
That destroys the appeal of vote buying greatly.
Profit adjustment from vote sellers would occur which would reduce their profits. Tie that in with 50/50 and having your delegation locked into bid bots that lost the exposure aspect and there being a possibility of high curation returns makes vote selling not the best choice anymore.
Steem is a blockchain everything is transparent. It would take a coder with minimal skill to find the reward pool drainers that no longer have the justification of calling vote buying "marketing".
You now added another reason to flag for people.
Posted using Partiko Android
I doubt that, especially considering the people who frontrun the bots and all the fools who jump in after the big vote because they don't realize what is happening and they think it will earn them curation rewards. I thought the exposure/marketing justification was there for the vast majority to justify cheating, not that they really want the exposure, why? Because there was almost always a lack of engagement from the buyers under their posts. In short, they buy because it does return a hefty profit, especially if you factor in the lecherous frontrunners and the idiots that pile on, comment or whatnot.
Try it out. If you max the potential buy i.e. buy to top of the trending page you are extremely unlikely to break even.
Well look at who the top buyers are individually. Exposure is a huge part of why they use bots. Hatu, zaku, chbartist, the turkish dude, the bald guy Jerry 2.0...
Based on what? Like I said, exposure is only an excause to cheat. If they didn't have exposure they would probably prefer it, the reason is because they return a profit, not only from bots, who are almost always profitable, even if it's not a whole lot, but also from all the other people that front run and that pile on after the bidbot drops the vote. Why do you think that they don't engage almost at all. All those people, top spots in a social media, and they do not give a fuck about their fans?
You also probably missed the begging one of the bots was doing at the top of trending a week or so ago, I think it was smart steem, pretty much spelling out "make some steem buying votes".
I saw a few posts examining the profit that bots return, not one found that it wasn't profitable, especially in the long term, and they did not factor in all the other votes that came with it.
trending page: if a post is say upvoted to $200, how much of a down vote is req for it not to be worth it for the author?
was going to ask you on the last post you wrote - so yeah some of us consume sometimes :)
It all depends on the vote buyer. Id assume it stops being worth it when it is taken off trending. They already incur a loss more times then not with bidbots.
Take away the exposure and it no longer makes sense to buy. Since they get nothing in return for their purchase.
But im saying that downvotes shouldnt be the main response here... Action by frontends to change the algo should.
The Summer vibes must be getting to your head :D F you too!!!
Haha. Im a dolphin. I can talk trash now. 😂
Posted using Partiko Android
Hi @lordbutterfly!
Your post was upvoted by @steem-ua, new Steem dApp, using UserAuthority for algorithmic post curation!
Your UA account score is currently 3.816 which ranks you at #4933 across all Steem accounts.
Your rank has dropped 174 places in the last three days (old rank 4759).
In our last Algorithmic Curation Round, consisting of 160 contributions, your post is ranked at #75.
Evaluation of your UA score:
Feel free to join our @steem-ua Discord server