By reading the title of my post yesterday, some people may not even have read the post, and assumed I am in favor of buying votes. My title was to state things in a free market way (Steem is a Free Market, Therefore Buying Votes is Voluntary and Not a Problem) which is the argument many use for why buying votes is acceptable and not a problem.
If you did read it, you can tell what I think buying votes does to the image and integrity of the platform by reading the 12 questions I asked people to think about as users of the platform.
To be clear, no, I don't like the idea of buying votes. I don't want this as a method of operation on the platform because it goes against the "spirit" of social media to honestly evaluate content and reward it because someone else appreciates and values the content to want to give it support. Buying votes for support seems dishonest. Look and think about how buying votes is looked at in the real world -- it's also seen as dishonest. But why is it perfectly OK when applied to Steem?
I have not used vote buying bots.
I have not used auto-vote bots.
I have not used curation-bots.
I have not used curation trails.
I have always chosen to manually upvote posts because I want to choose what content to support and give monetary value to.
The vote buying bots seem to be here to stay. Many witnesses approve, support and are part of the behavior with their own "services" for buying votes.
If we can't use the free market and causality to demonstrate if something is creating negative consequences for our individual and collective interest, then what are we to do?
Letting a few people do something that only has a minor effect to the whole community in the short-term won't get us to realize the problem in the long-term. If a majority of people do something that has negative consequences, we can see those consequences manifest quicker and more visibly. We can't seem to argue our way to a consensus to accept or reject this behavior, so how are we going to deal with the issue as a "community"?
Try to think of how voting works in different ways in society, where you can vote in board rooms, vote for a consensus like in a jury, etc. If you could just buy votes about a discussion or to determine the consensus (which is what buying SP and having SP votes applies to your content), then is the conclusion honest? Buying votes is not allowed in the real world for a reason. It produces results that are not reflective of an honest evaluation.
Buying votes in the real world is called vote fraud, isn't it? Why is it permissible on Steem, because people make money and we aren't voting for an election? Buying returns is all that matters? One person makes money, and the other person makes money, so that's all we need to think about to determine it's validity?
Thank you for your time and attention. Peace.
If you appreciate and value the content, please consider: Upvoting, Sharing or Reblogging below.
me for more content to come!
My goal is to share knowledge, truth and moral understanding in order to help change the world for the better. If you appreciate and value what I do, please consider supporting me as a Steem Witness by voting for me at the bottom of the Witness page; or just click on the upvote button if I am in the top 50.
