If you are not doing it for profit, there is an option to decline rewards.
Also, your friend Suesa (which got downvoted by my page) clearly got a very large % of his visibility and rewards from the bots for this article. I can see how it's a coincidence here as he doesn't use bots usually, but nonetheless his article should never have made trending. Without bots, it would have been near the 50$ range, as most of his other articles. The 500$+ he got from the bots, I consider as abuse, and I downvote it. I would do the same to anyone else.
I agree in a perfect world we would all waste our time to see if users are real and abusing or not. However, people who have time (i.e minnows) don't have the power, and people who have the power (whales), don't have the time.
Downvoting arbitrarily based on the % of value coming from bot upvotes is the best way to select and avoid personal wars. At least with this tool, it's clear I have personally nothing against all the people I downvoted yesterday. If we started doing it selectively, egos would come in and people would take it as a personal attacks.
Reasonable opinion. While I don't necessarily agree it is the best way, or even the only solution we need, it is certainly a reasonable one at this point.
First of all, @suesa contributes - a lot - for the community and the new Steemian. This is something you cannot see or will read about with that bot you created. Completely transparent and utterly unethical, based on a gamble and some shallow calculations, leaving all possible ethical aspects OUT of it.
Second of all, she did not even buy the votes herself, she doesn't really care for that either. It was a gift from someone who follows her and he wanted to reward her for -all- the time and contribution she already pledged on and for Steemit.
Third, yes that post had a 'too high' pay-out, for a joke. I downvoted it for 2 cents, "here are my 2 cents".
Fourth, she, as a contributor to the Steemit platform is worth so much more than that single stupid post's pay-out.
Lastly, who the fuck are you to judge -like this-? Can you not see the bigger picture @heimindanger what the actual fuck you have created? You are playing with other peoples money, based on crap. If you want to remove the crap, do it manually and do it with your own judgment.
Agreed, 85% of the rewards generated by bots is way too much, especially that the post is worth 800+, she wouldn't have made near that amount without the bots. It was a cute little joke, but now it's time to get off the trending page.
I think this is beneficial and it reminds me a lot of The Whale Voting Experiment, even if I wasn't on Steem back then.
Test: You got a 5.00% upvote from @jga courtesy of @fukako!
It is a personal attack, and you are now on my shitlist.
Trying to remove responsibility for your actions from some "tool" just makes you a tool.
"If you are not doing it for profit, there is an option to decline rewards."
Great idea if you want nobody to see your post. You are fucking naive, @heimindanger
Lex if you're going to sell your account it would be nice to let the community know. For your own good mostly because whoever this guy is running your account is making a fool of you.
look who is talking...
I have to agree.
I think it's informative to consider the tools you have recently begun to use in this regard.
You have changed, sir.
Very very good points, nice to see someone really laying into this.