The cost of bots isn't limited to the payments for their votes. Consider how curation is degraded thereby, and how that impacts the people who speak for reasons besides mere financial profit.
Bots are far more expensive to the system than only in financial terms, and Steemit is much more than an economy.
You could use bots to improve curation. I think you make a valid point but I do see bots as a proof of work concept and also a way to add some very badly needed value to the steem token.
I think the low value of steem is worse than the bots. I think the bots do help raise the value and increase earnings.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Curation is the process of upvoting content approved by people. Bots are the Anticurator. There is zero qualitative judgement in an automated vote.
Bots also decrease the value of Steem. Steem has value because people have it to use. Bots concentrate Steem in the accounts of those that already have the most of it.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I think bots increase the value of steem because it provides investors with an ROI and it also has a proof of work aspect to it as well.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I think history shows that doesn't encourage positive investment. Those investors I am aware of (not the original ninjaminers, but folks that paid cash for Steem) of consequence have simply used their stakes to sell votes, and gain a return, rather than spread Steem to more user's accounts, and thus put upwards pressure on the price.
The ROI gained from votebots concentrates Steem in accounts, rather than disperses it more widely, and thus do not put upwards pressure on the price. The various other mechanisms that have provided ROI on the platform, circlejerks, selfvotes, etc., neither spread Steem around, and have similar effect--even worse--to votebots.
Moderate delegations do increase dispersal of Steem, and thus put upwards pressure on the price, and might also potentiate modest ROI. Investors throughout and prior to recorded history have relied on capital gains as the provider of ROI, and moderate delegations do that too.
No rewards mining could compare to the gains potential to traders, speculators, profiteers, and investors of substantial price increase in Steem. I reckon the wide perception of unfairness by new users seeing the oligarchic distribution of Steem is the primary reason for the ~10% YOY retention rate, and this the primary reason for relatively stagnant price of the token.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I think the steem price would be lower without the investment.
You could help disperse it.
I think steem is a bit different because of its annuity factor.
I think we do need to work on user retention. I think some bots could help with that if we had better training.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Consider the demonstration of the effects of moderate delegations undertaken experimentally by @fulltimegeek, @stellabelle, and @aggroed a few months ago.
The reach of the curative power of large holdings of SP was dramatically extended into the community impractical for individual accounts. Almost all of the delegates reduced selfvoting, increased engagement, and improved their holdings at the same time. @abh12345 can provide analysis of the various metrics for you if you inquire, or just review his blog.
AFAIK, no comparison between the accounts impacted by that experiement and general retention was undertaken, due to the difficulty of the undertaking. I am confident that dramatic improvements would be revealed were that done.
Bots demonstrably have the opposite effect, being essentially rented selfvotes, reducing the dispersal of SP into the community, concentrating it in the accounts of the funders of the bots, and replacing engagement with financial manipulation.
Training and blacklisting simply can't obviate those essential features of the mechanism.
Mining rewards is a short term profiteering strategy, rather than investing, which would create capital gains far beyond what selfvotes can potentiate.
It's a sign of the sentiment of whales, that they eschew investing for profiteering. Hostile takeovers of companies with liquifiable assets is an apt comparison for how votebots impact Steemit.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I do think we need to do more to help new users. Hopefully in another month or two I will be able to provide a lot more assistance in part thanks to bots.
I think the low steem price is the biggest problem for this platform. Overall I think bots help raise the price although not as much as they should. Users also deserve mention for lowering the price of steem. It seems a lot of people are not very bullish on steem and do not convert their steem dollars into steem.
I think the main problem with rewards mining is the more legit users are not engaged in it.
If people like you are bullish on steem it seems like you'd want the rewards more and would engage in the mining.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
In this conversation I've provided numerous examples and discussed specific mechanisms that contradict your unsupported statements. You've not addressed them directly. You just keep repeating the same unsupported opinions.
We cannot arrive at mutual understanding if one of us isn't addressing the points of the other. Either discuss the examples I have cited, the mechanisms I have addressed, or simply continue to fail to understand them. If you do not actually grasp what I am saying, you cannot benefit from it. If you don't even try, well, that's on you.
I will point out that making a pretense of conversation while simply repeating talking points is a common tactic of propagandists. If that's the appearance you want to leave here, you're doing a great job. I reckon you'll not convince anyone else of your position by doing that, and at best, can simply circle the wagons of profiteers seeking to perpetuate the mining of rewards that continues to degrade the median payout, and disincentivize new accounts.
Have a look at the median payouts since last September, and compare it to the rise of votebots, and consider the correlation. Then consider user retention. Votebots are killing Steemit. Profiteers don't care, and only want to hide it so they can squeeze every possible satoshi from the rewards pool before Steemit collapses from disaffection of users who no longer chase the carrot of illusory rewards they see are being concentrated in the accounts of profiteers by votebots and similar financial manipulations.
tl;dr either address my examples and points, or fail to. Your call, and your loss if you don't.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit