I never self-vote, seems inauthentic. I rather give my votes to others so they can do the same.
RE: Self-voting, Vote Trading and Enlightened Game Theory
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Self-voting, Vote Trading and Enlightened Game Theory
I self vote maybe 1/20 or sometimes 1/10 but overall I think it's more like 1/100 and when I do it it's always because I want to move my comment up, some might call that disingenuous but I don't see one problem with using the clout and mechanism designed for that, to do that, yes it's still inauthentic with regard that the system is supposed to work with others curating others instead of others curating themselves and obviously this can be abused quite simply and to such an extent that it has become a rather serious problem, but there's quite a difference between upvoting yourself for visibility and doing it for profit.
This post talks about the prisoner dilemma and I think the people who are doing this are doing it because they have (1) invested their own money, and/or (2) they are here to make a buck, and/or (3) haven't suffered the usual direct consequences of abusing the self voting.
These people are justified in (1) and (2) and ignorant or unaware of (3), because simply it is up to everyone to say "hey, that's not right" and we have the tools to correct this, so that their objective to make money or return on their investment will need to adapt to "curate others and create".
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Good points. I understand the matter about getting visibility which makes sense. For those who invested their own money or are looking to make a buck, they should look at the long term implications of self-voting and if everyone else was doing that.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Too true, if they weren't shortsighted they might actually find something worth much more than money.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Truer words were never spoke.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
To be fair, I totally understand that those who invested will not want a change in the incentives structure, but doesn't it come down to whether Steem is a short-term cash cow, or a long-term social media platform?
Maybe if the economic incentives changed, self-voting on comments for visibility could seem more reasonable because in doing so, you would be sacrificing some profit for visibility. That feels like a more natural trade-off.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Those that see the problem with self voting (long term effects) will take appropriate measures against the problem on a case by case basis. Then if someone abuses the system they will have to Power Down and move out, or change ways. If they want to delegate that power it will be tainted and people will uncover them soon enough especially if they will continue on that path.
This in turn will probably drive such people to use alts and bots to self-vote which will be harder to pick up on, but wait for it, the day is coming when we will have even more data, correlating and matching who gets the majority of the RShares from so and so account and there won't be much that won't come under the light of inquiry and even now we have all the data we need to spot the majority of spam or especially collusive behavior we just don't have all the analytical options. And this is the network winning thus far, wrong will always exist and yet we have within ourselves to confront our demons and I think the most direct way would be the best way to go about dealing with abuse. Call it out, say hey, this isn't right, if everyone followed your example there wouldn't be a point to community.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
The difficulty of analysis isn't as severe as the flag disincentive problem. I work on many such tools as @steemreports.
If somebody only has a profit motive, trying to change their behaviour though appeals to morality or long-termism won't work as well as changing the economic incentives.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
No, it's through appeals to profit, you can flag them and remove their incentive, they will then have to power down and move on, find another sucker. If people call it out, if we become aware of it then it's very much our responsibility then to correct it. If we try to appeal to the few fence sitters by compromising our authors then I think we're shooting ourselves in the foot. If flagging doesn't work (ultimately) then maybe we should consider something else, but why tax the content producers for the acts of a few?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I feel the same. I clearly value my own opinion, else I wouldn't share it with others. The point of this platform is for others to decide (and vote with their wallet) if they value my opinion as well.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Exactly!.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit