The door for comment farming was always open, with both systems. Honestly this changes nothing, other than ninjas not getting a bigger share of the pie. Which is good for the rest of the 99% users. Even big whales autovoting are happy with this. Case closed.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
The fundamental change that this brings is that it removes the advantage of self voting not autovoting. As an author you can always front-run everybody since leo doesn't have a voting window like hive or other tribes. That is a good thing. It also levels the playing field for curators. But people that don't want to put an effort to manually curate will not have an incentive to not autovote (it's financially agnostic to do so and in fact there is still an opportunity cost to do manual curation -with any system-). As I said I am not that pessimistic but I still remember the effects that the linear curve for author rewards had on steem.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
With a time window of exactly 0 seconds, you are wrong even in this. Often autovoters would vote my post first in the 1 second i needed to click the upvote button.
They have an incentive. They make the same amount of money with manual curators while putting zero effort.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta
I am only wrong if the author selfvotes manually, but if they have a bot setup they have the same advantage as other autovoters versus the rest of the crowd. The main argument of my post is that there is no extra incentive to curate manually vs doing it via code with a bot (they both have the same apr).
There is still an opportunity cost to do manual curation due to how time consuming it is. As a told khaleelkazi I am not opposed to the change I think it's better from a macro point of view by leveling the playing field. From an individual perspective it is still more cost effective to setup a bot but at least manual curators do not lose out vs the autovoters.
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta