RE: Bitcoin dominance is a metric of crypto failure, not success
@transisto your bot just starting flagging me for self-upvoting, i have my bot self upvote only when i'm at 99.99% so it's not wasted.
This is my last week report self upvote report, only 17.2%
I gave more than $80 of my monies running community server that can't pay back...been doing this for 80% of my time here in Steemit.
17.2% is merely $2.04 a month. And I give >$80, >82% all my upvots, >90% of my Steem Power Delegation. I lose money every month supporting Steemians.
I do not post - I do not earn consistently from the reward pool
I do not take, i only give, please stop your bot from flagging good Steemians
@lukestokes, @lukestokes.mhth, @almost-digital, @newsflash, @promobot, @transisto, @dana-varahi
This is the flag of my $0.04 cents....and I delegate >90% of my SP away to other Steemians, Projects, and Communities. If I wanted to abuse self upvote I would keep it all for myself, and selfupvote my post (which I don't make) and all my commments (which i don't).
Please start a whitelist and review your code.
I can't speak for @transisto but I would flag you and your self-upvotes if I didn't feel your content added value. I don't care if it is one vote per year. If it isn't deserved on the basis of the content adding value or evidencing of added value then the vote is undeserved. There is not such thing as 'wasted' vote power, because the vote power does not (and associated rewards do not) 'belong' to you, it is (they are) a community resource.
The sort of entitlement that you demonstrate in this comment (and also by putting it here in an offtopic thread just to bitch) makes me more likely to downvote you not less. But I won't do it unless I happen to see undeserved rewards (and I don't spend much time looking right now).
Whether a self-upvote is added value or not is or can be, theoretically at least, too subjective as opposed to being objective enough as value can be determined by subjective opinions based on non-shared principles, values, ideas. I say it is or can be more subjective and more 50 shades of grey, of gray, much more than we may know.
Everything about Steem content is subjective. None of the voting on Steem is objective in any real way. Even automated bot votes are done because the bot owner/developer subjectively believes that is a 'good' way to vote. This is all both by design and unavoidable. People downvoting in a manner that they, subjectively, feel is best is how things are supposed to work.
I'm actually not, personally, someone who is terribly hung up about self-voting. But when others do feel that way, that is their valid opinion, and it is perfectly okay that they act on it.
Be clear on this though: There is nothing objective going on here, ever. All upvotes and downvotes are subjective.
what he said
Agreed. I don't really care if people upvote themselves.
Hi. I'm in the process of reviewing the code, we're actually in the middle of an upgrade so this situation will change. You might be one of the few false positives but I'll need to confirm that.
In any case there will be no whitelist, however if there's a bug it will be fixed.
Note also while transisto is kind of "director" and I am the technical person(z), it is a community funded project.
thanks for reaching out and responding @personz
send me the discord link to your community
what can we do to help improve this, and have consideration or discussion started to open source (or at least be open for it to be reviewed by community devs so they can point out weaknesses, better filters, etc) so you can get input?
@idikuci, @holger90, @harpagon
you are free to tell me to fcuk off, i'm honestly not interested in a flag project, but i'm interested in preventing accidental abuse and leaving early steemians, investors, and newbiew with the mindset that it's the people of the blockchain against them
Interesting proposal, I'll think about it. Since you're not interested I guess your involvement ends here though.
The community is very loose knit, we don't sit around all day discussing it. People who delegate are people who agree with the project strongly and who can see by evidence what it does.
Maybe it could be opened up to general criticism. Again I'll think about it.