You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: #trending #153
You're spot on, @shaka. And that's why it's also not suprising that the author doesn't answer your question :-) Wie sagt man so schön: wer im Glashaus sitzt, sollte nicht mit Steinen werfen...
Hi Marly,
just to clarify my stance, I don´t criticize anyone for providing a service that is a logical consequence of the economic changes that were introduced with HF19 (delegations and linear rewards). As sad as it may be, bid bots won't go away as long as no systematic changes are (re)introduced. Counting on unselfish or community oriented behaviour is an understandable expectation, yet an expectation that inevitably results in disappointment whenever money is involved. So what we observe is a matter of how the incentives are currently set.
Still, it remains elusive to me which message @themarkymark aims to convey with this post. To me it seems as if an ad broker would complain that there are to many ads around. It´s his business and he is free to run it. However, complaining about the logical outcome of this business is weird (assuming now, that the message of this post is some sort of a complaint).
Cheers!
Totally got it and support your point of view!
I believe bid bots are completely against the decentralized belief. I'd like to quote a tweed from Dan Larimer to underline that:
It's definitely a design problem in first instance. Apparently we accept that there is no economical circle anymore - like the one that was designed when Steem was launched. Now money just flows into one direction - from the bottom to the top. Bid bots are not designed to support minnows, they're designed to take away their money.
I'm pretty curious if SMTs will be able to fix these fundamental issues.
My response above.
Actually, I just did respond when I had a chance to catch up, but thanks stopping by.
PS: Don't forget that this is a troll-free zone