There has been a lot of talk around about those who self-upvote posts and their own comments. Pre-HF 19, this wasn’t such a big issue, and didn’t seem to be as big a problem, but since the introduction of linear rewards, the instance of users upvoting their own comments seems to have sky-rocketed. With the granting of more voting power to users with smaller SP, this ‘loop-hole’ was always going to be exploited.
Self-upvoting on Comments
On a recent post I gained numerous responses from different users commenting on the post. All of the responses were very positive, affirmative and some even shared experiences of their own.
However, the first thing I noticed was that many of the commenters had immediately upvoted their own comments. Why?
My perspective is that when I comment, I want to add value to a post, and therefore would only expect someone to upvote my comment if they thought it added value also.
I have seen some comments upvoted so that they go to the top of the list of a post, which again, I believe should be the decision of other users to determine whether that comment adds value to the post and therefore deserves an upvote.
There is nothing currently stopping users from buying into STEEM and using their new-found power to create uninspiring, uninformative posts and commenting and upvoting everything they produce. This doesn’t add the value to the platform we all expect and doesn’t contribute to the quality content that we all expect. It drains the rewards pool and detracts from the users who are here to add value to the platform and build a community.
There have been numerous solutions and reasons debated here over the past week or so but what do we expect as a community?
Possible solutions (in no particular order):
Rollback the linear rewards curve of HardFork 19. Perhaps not go back to the n2 curve, but look at another formulation that is somewhere in between. Now I can hear minnows everywhere going , whoa, hold on there buddy, that means I’ll have less influence. But at the moment, the rewards pool is draining fast since HF19 and the linear curve has to be the reason behind this as this 'drain' wasn't there pre-HF19. The question has to be asked, voting power or quality content?
Automatically flag/downvote anyone who self-upvotes their own comment. This would negate this practice and stop it from happening. Perhaps voting bots could handle this as an automated way of monitoring the voting system.
Half-half vote: @azfix suggested that a half-half vote was implemented. If you upvote your own comment, then you automatically upvote the comment/post you are responding to. What if you are commenting on your own post?
@stellabelle suggests in her post here that we should unfollow and disengage from users that self-upvote their own comments. Now I think this is a great solution for us that really believe in the platform and are here for the right reasons. What about those who are not? What about those who are not thinking about the longevity of the community or the platform?
@aggroed has published a list of shameless 'self-upvoters' which can be readily found on the blockchain to assist in this solution if its the right way to go.
You have to put in effort and give to the platform and community before you should expect to receive anything.
@papa-pepper raised some great ideas in a recent post HERE. He highlighted that STEEMIT is not a get rich quick scheme.
Actually interact with others and even try to care about them, instead of just caring about yourself and your wallet - @papa-pepper
There have been some users arrive lately that have had great success quickly for a number of different reasons. It requires dedication and effort to build a group of followers who value your content and the value you bring to the community.
Some other questions I would like you to ponder:
- is it ok to upvote your own posts?
- is it ok to buy votes to upvote your posts? – ie. Randowhale, etc.
- what is ethically and morally wanted for the Steem platform?
I am no coding expert or a witness and don’t really know how to implement a solution, however, if something is not done, rewards that should be put to better use and apportioned to those adding value will continue to be siphoned off and possibly make the platform less attractive to new, vibrant users who have so much to give.
I am concerned at this blatant ‘ripping off’ of the reward pool. Hopefully a solution can be reached to address the issue and encourage high quality work to achieve the recognition it deserves.
What is it that we, the community and users of SteemIT want?
What is it that we as the community thinks is acceptable?
What do you think?
.png)
These are just the opinions and views of one person.
Thanks for reading.
I think all the "self voting lists" and the entire issues is completely over-shadowing all kinds of other work we should be doing on the Steemit platform.
To quote @smooth:
"Someone who buys SP and then selfvotes is not 'draining' anything and at best can get back a portion of what was put in. It causes no harm at all."
Investors are the ones who underwrite all of the rewards on this platform. If you are not an investor, or are only a smaller investor, you need to focus your efforts on creating inspiring content that makes investors want to give their money to you. Whatever else they do or don't do with their money (including self-voting) is not your concern and does not harm you in any way. Nevertheless, you do have a downvote that you can use to disagree with what you think are underserved rewards. I suggest using it."
"The idea of creating 'lists of shame' and demonizing people is divisive, creates a hostile and toxic environment attractive to no one, and serves no useful purpose. There is no way to tell from these lists whether the content is deserving of the rewards or not. The only way to tell is by actually looking at the content, and if you think it is undeserving, downvote it."
"Your own statistics show that self-voting is awarding about 8.5% of the reward pool. I don't find that suggestive of any problem whatsoever. It is probably a very reasonable number given that the current parameters give people 10 full power votes to make per day. Thus one is being applied to the voters' own content and nine to others' (on average, of course). Seems fine."
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I agree that investors should be able to reap a return on their investment too as long as they are contributing to the platform either by upvoting worthwhile content or posting worthwhile content. Otherwise, what's the point of steemit as a platform? It might as well be just another crypto. I think the ability to interact and lock information into the block chain is an important component of the platform too.
My concern with your comment is that most of the comment you have posted is not your own content and I wonder whether it adds any additional value to the platform. I then wonder whether this reply to you comment will also be considered to be adding just as much value to the platform as your comment and be upvoted accordingly or this won't be a consideration as it opposes your views on the subject? I would like to believe that this platform can also be used to reward other people for their creative content and not be another avenue for greed. I don't have an issue with self-upvoting per se, if users are kind enough to spread their power and goodwill to other users and vote up quality content. To post a comment on another users post, self-upvote it and not give that users post an upvote too is plainly wrong though. If they had not created the content, then you would not have the opportunity to post a comment to self upvote. Those are my views.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Congratulations! This post has been upvoted from the communal account, @minnowsupport, by Scooter77 from the Minnow Support Project. It's a witness project run by aggroed, ausbitbank, teamsteem, theprophet0, someguy123, neoxian, followbtcnews/crimsonclad, and netuoso. The goal is to help Steemit grow by supporting Minnows and creating a social network. Please find us in the Peace, Abundance, and Liberty Network (PALnet) Discord Channel. It's a completely public and open space to all members of the Steemit community who voluntarily choose to be there.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I have no problem with someone upvoting their own comment if it truly adds value to the post and they believe it is important for others to read it. The upvote can move it closer to the top so more people can see it.
What I have a major problem with is someone leaving a comment, upvoting that comment, but not even upvoting the post itself. This is the pinnacle of self-serving Steemit behaviour and worthy of a flag.
It's also a little upsetting to see someone upvote their lame comment, like "nice post." I won't necessarily flag those, but I'd say that's someone worth disengaging with.
Overall, I think it's important to value the financial investment someone has made in STEEM which benefits all of us by propping up the value of STEEM. These people will be mindful of the need to get the best return on their investment. In fact, anyone with an SP balance has a similar interest.
As far as randowhale and boost, I see no issue with this whatsoever. It's simply someone providing a service, selling their voting power.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Thanks for the input. Lots of different opinions and views on this one.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
True. Here's another good post on the topic: https://steemit.com/steemit/@lukestokes/self-voting-scammy-behavior-rational-roi-or-something-else
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
What's an up vote? Isn't it upgoat?
(pixabay.com)
Nah but in all seriousness, this is a real problem. IMO in the next fork, they should just remove the ability to upgoat your own comments. That would be much better than any community policed solution. Just stop it right at the source, remove the ability from the code.
I think posts is OK, but you shouldn't do it at the start, as it discourages curation. With the whole declining post rewards thing, you're better off saving your own-post upgoat for later in the week. As such, I think outlaying capital to buy an upgoat for your own post is OK too, but once again, this should be done later in the week.
Lately I've been buying votes from @minnowbooster and @randowhale on 6 day posts, I find this stops reward decline in its tracks and even leaves you with a couple dollars of profit.
@reggaemuffin is thinking of having @minnowbooster discern between a gifted upgoat and a 'selfgoat'. There wouldn't be any financial penalty, just a different pic and text pointing out you're selfgoating ...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Great points and upgoats/upboats/upvotes are all at the users discretion atm. It is a cause for concern as its being abused by some, not all. Thanks for reading.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
all of this. I'm not sure why in a system designed to encourage community that self-votes even became a thing. I like everything I've posted. If I didn't like it, I wouldn't have posted it. I don't need to upvote it to show that, so the only reason I can see for it is counter to engaging in a community and thinking of self first.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Great Post. I hate all the people up-voting their comments. I get why they do it but there's nothing worse than seeing "nice" commented on every post with an upvote. Does nothing for the community.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
This is really on point - and the answer is not at all clear. I wonder if a graduated voting distribution could be arranged somehow? Meaning minnowd have more voting power per vote relative to their size whereas whales individual voting power regresses as the amount of sp gets higher? To be honest, I'm not sure i understand the current voting scheme to know whether what I'm describing is plausible.
Re: randowhale and minnowbooster - i think as an early user these can be invaluable as a means of getting posts to be hot and actually, possibly getting some new views/followers. I see a lot of people talk about these services as a means of addig value at the end of a posts life span. This might be more questionable - but easily solved if the community disagrees with it - by putting on a short time limit for the use of such services. But as a form of "promotion" that actually works for newer users, it's unparalleled.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Thanks for reading. I agree they can be invaluable services, however, what if you are upvoting poor content. I know this is subjective, but it can be and is being abused by some users.
As to changing the rewards curve, whales have been here a while and still need to keep their relative influence, I feel that some minnows are just posting poor quality too and upvoting themselves into oblivion. This is occurring across all levels of power as well though.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Absolutely whales should retain their overall power - but perhaps the distribution of their voting power can return closer to pre-hf19 levels relative to their overall sp. Minnows may try to self upvote to oblivion but my 100% is worth 7 cents so it wouldn't matter so much. This would mean more votes for whales before running out of power but less abolity to catapult with a single vote
As to using randowhale and whatnot on bad content - or even lots more bad content existing - yeah. I think adding communities to steemit will help with that - so communities or community mods can better manage their tags contents and crap can be weeded out
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I like your thinking. I do see whales now being able to trend posts by themselves. Before the HF it took a group to get something trending.
I also think the communities will make things better and easier to manage.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Upvoted.... we are on the same page brothers and I am giving my best to address this problem. I love your suggestion of half votes. That would definitely add value to all writers.
My latest post on this matter is
https://steemit.com/selfvotes/@yoda1917/steemit-is-coming-to-an-end-say-good-bye-or-let-s-do-something-about-it
Hope it adds value to your fight against this practice :)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
https://steemit.com/steemit/@yoda1917/self-upvoting-is-no-longer-allowed-what-would-be-the-consequences-what-would-be-the-benefits
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit