![enter image description here](https://i.imgsafe.org/b5cb0db00f.jpg)

I was thinking about doing a post about how after all the comments and posts I've done about bots and how to combat them, I now want to make friends with them.

The reason I say this, is because I have a tiny auto-vote bot fanclub and I appreciate them almost as much as I appreciate real human fans.

Whaaaa???

Hear me out...

Bot Groupies
------------

These bots, I assume have been given some kind of algorithmic pattern to follow and using that formula, they have fallen upon my posts. They, without emotion, have chosen me and I'm flattered, not just because they seem to be whale-bots, but because they are an indication to others to read and enjoy me.

The thing that finally tipped me over the edge and got me writing this piece, was seeing a [post from a bot maker](https://steemit.com/curation/@steemed/im-a-steem-whale-looking-for-writers) who also happens to be a Whale, asking for quality writers to follow.

You see he pointed out, that he checked his bots to see if they were picking good content, the point of the bot for him, was to alert him to good content. Not just to vote on, but to actually read and enjoy.

That got me thinking... I don't want to let my little binary fanclub down. I need to feed them good, quality, original content, or they'll die.

>*Unless you're a tobacco company, killing your fans, is generally considered a bad idea.*


The Autobot Meritocracy
-----------------
![enter image description here](https://i.imgsafe.org/bdf5c4a6df.jpg)

I admit finding good content to read, isn't going to be what motivates all bot-creators. But, reading that article, cemented the thought in my mind that; I had been thinking about the auto-vote bots in completely the wrong way. 

Any bots in the Steemit system, that are consistently voting on poor content are of no use to the system and therefore are of no use to the owner.

A vote-bot is only as good as the votes it makes, it quite literally lives and dies by those decisions. So whilst it may be annoying to some Steemites, that the vote-bots are getting in early and getting a larger share of the rewards. Those very same Steemites should be pleased that they are consistently voting on the same content as bots, or that theirs is the content, the bots deem to give their precious votes.

Over time, in any automated system of, progressive merit, only the best performers will survive. It is only in flawed human systems, we see poor performers promoted over high achievers because of group-biased nepotism.

In a system like Steemit, where the vote-bots are competing with each other as much as the other human users; their is no nepotism, the poor performing ones will be switched off. Therefore, each and every vote is precious to a bot, if it wastes too many, it's curtains.

Their evolution, of course, will be swift and without mercy and whilst you may still baulk at the idea of any kind of automation, the bots are here to stay and are actually providing a valuable service for you.

Autobot Evolutions
------------------

![enter image description here](https://i.imgsafe.org/b5cac8adb7.jpg)

Imagine you are an auto-votebot, you have been the call sign; AV1.0; you have been given a simple algorithm, which leads you to two outcomes:

**Vote on all of *CryptoGee's* posts over 350 words (he's great :-) ) and vote on everything @dantheman votes on.**

Now imagine, that you have a clone: AV2.0 and it has come out with two protocols which are basically the opposite: 

**Vote on all @dantheman's posts and vote on everything *CryptoGee* votes on.**

Clearly a bot will have more parameters than that, but just with those two commands, the bot would prove it's worth.

A simple check from your user, by reading some or all of the posts that you have voted on, will assess whether you've made the right decisions.

Your creator has to check your results, because your whole reason of being, is to vote on high quality content, because that makes the most money, even if money isn't necessarily your maker's main motivation.

A results check for AV1.0 may register that *CryptoGee* is a great poster (of course) and that @dantheman's votes are generally on high value posts.

Whilst AV2.0 reports that *CryptoGee* votes are all over the place and generally low value and @dantheman's posts are high value.

Therefore the creator can tweak AV1.0 to not follow *CryptoGee's* voting patterns, but to stick to his posts. Whilst AV2.0 can carry on.

End Point
---------
![enter image description here](https://i.imgsafe.org/be0703f0b7.jpg)

As I said, I've grossly oversimplified and maybe that's partly because I have no idea how to write one; or even how a bot works. But I see them as a potential force for good, especially in the right hands.

> *"With great power, comes great responsibility"*
> 
> *Ben Parker* - *Uncle of Peter*

Bots that are good, are good because they are choosing good content meaning they will stay in the system and they will be indicators to their owners - *and anyone who bothers to works out who they are* - that the content they've just voted on is worth reading.

The bad bots will not survive, they will be reprogrammed or turned off, for them there will be no redemption.

The auto-vote bots on Steemit will be competing with each other on a grand scale, regardless of who they're owned by. Each one fighting to prove itself as a top performer. In that respect I feel an affinity with them and so should you, because as a Steemit blogger, that is exactly what you are trying to do. 

Fight, survive, swim to the top, and on your way to greatness, you will build up a fanclub of autovote-bot friends; you will need to embrace your autobot fans, because like any good friends, they'll be there when you need them.

*Follow function will be here soon, until then, create a folder on your bookmarks bar. Then [click here and stick the CryptoGee blog in it](https://steemit.com/@cryptogee).*

Till Next Time

*[CryptoGee](https://steemit.com/@cryptogee)*