Hey Andrew, I understand that part.
My reservation in using this service is that I do not wish for people to buy votes when their content is quite frankly useless. For me, that perpetuates the concept of who has money has power. I would like to think that this is a platform where you earn Steem Power and now buy yourself to the top.
In my frenzy of frustration I might not have made myself terribly clear haha
Maybe I just live in a utopian idealist mindset. - I believe you do, at least for the moment. I stopped using voting bots a week ago I guess only because they were mainly used by people who were not producing quality content. The platform here has an interesting vision about valuable content. And with money, almost everybody can buy upvotes. Minnowbooster has some mechanisms of detecting spam and plagiarism, and they also have a blacklist, as few other bots I saw have started to make and do not allow these people to use the bots.
This is a good thing for Steem, but still who has plenty of money can upvote themselves their content and push it up like a lot. So you can say that who has the money, has a louder voice :D
I liked your light-hearted conclusion to the blue paper. Valuable content is completely subjective and I cannot argue with that.
Is it wrong to weed out the "pop-corn trail"? Or to be angry at those that abuse their loud voice?
Until now didn't really think of how easily miss interpreted the blue paper could be...