RE: Proposal to make spam less profitable by enjar

View this thread on steempeak.com

Viewing a response to: @timcliff/re-enjar-re-timcliff-proposal-to-make-spam-less-profitable-20180416t024427203z

· @enjar ·
$3.28
# Are the comments people are making actually adding value?
The big thing  I see is a collective value overall or just an individual value to one person. Most comments to tend to be geared towards adding value to the person they are interacting with. If someone makes a blog and the only person to reply to it is a “nice job” and author upvote it. Did they just add value in the eyes of that author who poured their soul and heart into something and only 1 person left a message?  Well, we have our answer they upvote it. Now overall it could get downvoted by not adding value to another person to what it was upvoting to. 

Other times you can have comments that try and build on or create further conversion. However, if no one engages with it, Did it add value overall to that blog in the first place?  My answer would be no it failed to do so. 

You have many people who will read a blog and then make a blog about it instead of leaving their comment in it. I could have done this; however, I doubt anyone would have read and left a comment on it. Even more so if someone did leave a wonderful comment it will get even fewer views than my blog.  Since it was in my eyes a better way to add a value in leaving a comment here instead I did so. 

Part of me would be fine with a comment daily limit. But I know those people who want to spam will just make more accounts. Which seems like it just is hurting legit users who find themselves in need going over the cap. Could an SP cap that unlocks more comments per day even be a thing? That at least not limit services that are dealing with spammers, phishing attempts, or trying find some other way in adding value to their copy/past messages. 

I myself can only put out what I consider a couple of high quality comments a day. Sure I could make 100 comments in a single day but those rarely ever in my eyes add value. 

Part of me wonders at what point are we going be dealing with so much bloat that comments with zero upvotes or further comments to them will just get purged from the system right before voting period closes. 
# Arbitrary requirement
You don’t need an account just to read things if you never plan to comment/blog in any way. How big is a single user curate impact with just the starting delegation amount? Sure I’ve seen people running around with 500-1k accounts upvoting a total of what $2-3. 

The biggest issue here is people not in our ecosystem cannot reward people. So while I can see a reason someone would want create an account who never plans to comment/blog. I just find it strange if you are already logged into an account that you do not on occasion have something to say in the comment section below. In my eyes that ignoring a very key element here but I will admit I have a bias on this I leave a lot of comments. Perhaps there are far more people using account creation who are not engaging in any other way than a upvotingthat is ligament users than those taking advantage of the system.  



# Overall
I’m still hoping some kind of solution to limiting spammers bandwidth so they are unable to proceed is the answer.  Unless a decentralized platform can shadowban users. But since they don’t really seem into banning accounts I’m not going hold my breath of some kind of shadowban mechanic. Even more so since those can be used to restrict freedom of speech. 

Otherwise, I fear the negative impact having an increased threshold. If someone living in part of the world where they only need make $1 a day spamming they only need 1 good hit to accomplish their goal for that day. While I would hope anyone with that kind of upvote would not I somehow can see it happening enough. 

If the threshold is 1$ any blog making less than that is going be hurting even more since it's doubtful any kind of engagement in comment sections will result in making that threshold.

If it's only .05 and we are going with the assumption that person only needs to make $1 than they only need 20 spam comments to be over this at most. As such I don't see that making any kind of meaningful impact of reducing spam. 

Then we are left with the social/culture way people are communicating these days. One short dive into a youtube comment section or a look on twitter and people seem to be just leaving short “nice, great video,  whatever.” In my mind, I don’t see that as creating value and as spam; while, others don’t view it as spam.  Which seems to leave us to the point where individual users have to decide this and vote accordingly.
👍  
properties (23)
post_id43,804,807
authorenjar
permlinkre-timcliff-re-enjar-re-timcliff-proposal-to-make-spam-less-profitable-20180416t041054267z
categorysteem
json_metadata"{"app": "steemit/0.1", "tags": ["steem"]}"
created2018-04-16 04:10:57
last_update2018-04-16 04:10:57
depth3
children0
net_rshares646,480,559,944
last_payout2018-04-23 04:10:57
cashout_time1969-12-31 23:59:59
total_payout_value2.462 SBD
curator_payout_value0.819 SBD
pending_payout_value0.000 SBD
promoted0.000 SBD
body_length4,512
author_reputation94,044,485,172,635
root_title"Proposal to make spam less profitable"
beneficiaries[]
max_accepted_payout1,000,000.000 SBD
percent_steem_dollars10,000
author_curate_reward""
vote details (1)