It wasnt a mistake. Flagger was just being salty or flexing his self-righteous muscles. According to him I was downvoted for using two bidbots. The flagger didn't even factor in how much was spent on the bidbots. He even claimed I didn't have enough engagement. Really?
https://steemit.com/classaction/@ulqu3/class-action-suit-against-stox
So now, I have to take my time to write an article, then force people to comment instantly in order to please the self-appointed steemit police?
Does the word "decentralized" mean nothing to you?
I'll take 3 people talking about the content of the article over 100 yes men looking for an upvote.
The irony is this same person has like 30 posts with like 1 comment or none. But okay
Some people consider buying votes as abuse no matter how little Steem is exchanged. It is annoying, but at least you know what their problem was.
For 3 years, vote buying was tolerated. Steem didn't grow enough and slowly sank to rank 80. A few people profitted immensely, but no one wants to join a platform that sells votes. It is too much like traditional social media.
For 3 years vote buyers had their way and were winning. Suddenly they are losing and they hate Steem. At least the against side endured 3 years. Let's give it at least a year to see what happens now that vote buying isn't tolerated.
It means the lack of a central authority. Mob rule is still possible.
Steem has always had a consensus of top 20 witnesses or a majority of Steem decide things. Steem allows downvotes and upvotes.
You don't have to accept the etiquette, you don't have to like the consequences.
You can start a scot token with internalized bidding and no one will mind as long as it doesnt involve steem or more SP than necessary for RC. We all know how well this token will do.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit