Viewing a response to: @musing-threads/pkn8rz7hq
<a href="https://musing.io/q/groynes/how-effective-resource-credit-is-in-keeping-spam-in-check-in-steem-ecosystem"><b>View this question on Musing.io</b></a>
author | groynes |
---|---|
permlink | f3wwaydhq |
category | musing-threads |
json_metadata | "{"app":"musing/1.1","appTags":["Steem","steemit"],"appCategory":"Steem","appTitle":"How effective resource credit is in keeping spam in check in steem ecosystem?","appBody":"","appDepth":1,"musingAppId":"aU2p3C3a8N","musingAppVersion":"1.1","musingPostType":"question"}" |
created | 2019-04-20 05:53:12 |
last_update | 2019-04-20 05:53:12 |
depth | 1 |
children | 8 |
last_payout | 2019-04-27 05:53:12 |
cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
total_payout_value | 0.022 HBD |
curator_payout_value | 0.006 HBD |
pending_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
promoted | 0.000 HBD |
body_length | 157 |
author_reputation | 2,685,713,863,414 |
root_title | "Musing Posts" |
beneficiaries | [] |
max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
percent_hbd | 10,000 |
post_id | 83,422,093 |
net_rshares | 56,854,229,000 |
author_curate_reward | "" |
voter | weight | wgt% | rshares | pct | time |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
glenalbrethsen | 0 | 43,385,671,645 | 21% | ||
fbook | 0 | 440,815,901 | 5% | ||
resuscitate | 0 | 13,027,741,454 | 100% |
<a href="https://musing.io/q/groynes/how-effective-resource-credit-is-in-keeping-spam-in-check-in-steem-ecosystem">View this answer on Musing.io</a>
author | cryptoandcoffee |
---|---|
permlink | pk33du8hw |
category | musing-threads |
json_metadata | "{"app":"musing/1.1","appTags":["Steem","steemit"],"appCategory":"Steem","appTitle":"How effective resource credit is in keeping spam in check in steem ecosystem?","appBody":"<p>I think we have to go back and remember how bad spam was before the Resource Credits were introduced. Everything on the block chain has a cost attached to it and needs to be paid for somehow. i can't recall the figure but it was more than half of the transactions at one point were spam. </p>\n<p>Resource Credits reduced the amount of spam overnight and it has been a massive success. There is very little you can do with 15 SP and it may have affected new accounts from growing immediately, but after a few weeks they would start to grow anyway. There are accounts offering assistance to the new accounts so I don't think it is a huge issue.</p>\n<p>I am big fan of Resource Credits as it opens up other opportunities in the future for just delegating RC's and keeping your SP.</p>\n<p><br></p>","appDepth":2,"appParentPermlink":"f3wwaydhq","appParentAuthor":"groynes","musingAppId":"aU2p3C3a8N","musingAppVersion":"1.1","musingPostType":"answer"}" |
created | 2019-04-20 13:19:48 |
last_update | 2019-04-20 13:19:48 |
depth | 2 |
children | 0 |
last_payout | 2019-04-27 13:19:48 |
cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
total_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
curator_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
pending_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
promoted | 0.000 HBD |
body_length | 148 |
author_reputation | 3,665,745,889,981,193 |
root_title | "Musing Posts" |
beneficiaries | [] |
max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
percent_hbd | 10,000 |
post_id | 83,440,574 |
net_rshares | 439,239,947 |
author_curate_reward | "" |
voter | weight | wgt% | rshares | pct | time |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
fbook | 0 | 439,239,947 | 4.99% |
I think as long as the value of STEEM is low, resource credits are keeping spam lower than it was. It takes some established spam farms, with some RCs spread out among each account, to effectively get off the ground. Most can't survive. However, that's not to say spam is completely gone, but it is much better, in my opinion then it was before. However, as some are noting, it has done so at the cost of the new user, who doesn't immediately find a way through delegations, investing or otherwise powering up to raise the effective level of RCs. So, it's been a double edged sword, and at a cost to actual legit accounts. What will be interesting to see is, how quickly the activity in dormant spam accounts where the SP delegation has yet to be removed will return as the price of STEEM rises. It will also be interesting to see how quickly Steemit Inc acts in their removal of delegations to said accounts after they revive. The fact that Steemit has decided to remove the delegations from proven spammers, scammers and plagiarists is actually a step in a more effective direction, and will probably be the cause of reducing spam on the blockchain, even if it means those spammers will continue to find ways to open new accounts. It would be nice if we could move to some form of Know Your Customer/Client so alt accounts could be immediately traced to the main account. I don't know how that would work without some folks feeling their privacy was being invaded, but I've yet to figure out what good someone will actually do for the blockchain by opening up hundreds of alt accounts. I know what they hope to do. I don't know how it really helps others. it would be nice to get to a point where we can actually identify legit users vs. bots or alt accounts meant to form some flavor of farm. It would also be nice to then be able to up the RCs to the legit users so they can function until they have enough on their own. By knocking down spam, we've effectively cut off the new users ability to do anything, and since they can't really do anything, they can't really complain about it effectively, so then most people think everything is just fine when there's a growing, ongoing issue that will need to be resolved at some point, rather than being oblivious to it or ignoring it.
author | glenalbrethsen |
---|---|
permlink | p36ag5l7q |
category | musing-threads |
json_metadata | "{"app":"steemit/0.1","appTags":["Steem","steemit"],"appCategory":"Steem","appTitle":"How effective resource credit is in keeping spam in check in steem ecosystem?","appBody":"<p>I think as long as the value of STEEM is low, resource credits are keeping spam lower than it was. It takes some established spam farms, with some RCs spread out among each account, to effectively get off the ground. Most can't survive.</p>\n<p>However, that's not to say spam is completely gone, but it is much better, in my opinion then it was before.</p>\n<p>However, as some are noting, it has done so at the cost of the new user, who doesn't immediately find a way through delegations, investing or otherwise powering up to raise the effective level of RCs. So, it's been a double edged sword, and at a cost to actual legit accounts.</p>\n<p>What will be interesting to see is, how quickly the activity in dormant spam accounts where the SP delegation has yet to be removed will return as the price of STEEM rises. It will also be interesting to see how quickly Steemit Inc acts in their removal of delegations to said accounts after they revive.</p>\n<p>The fact that Steemit has decided to remove the delegations from proven spammers, scammers and plagiarists is actually a step in a more effective direction, and will probably be the cause of reducing spam on the blockchain, even if it means those spammers will continue to find ways to open new accounts.</p>\n<p>It would be nice if we could move to some form of Know Your Customer/Client so alt accounts could be immediately traced to the main account. I don't know how that would work without some folks feeling their privacy was being invaded, but I've yet to figure out what good someone will actually do for the blockchain by opening up hundreds of alt accounts. I know what they hope to do. I don't know how it really helps others.</p>\n<p>it would be nice to get to a point where we can actually identify legit users vs. bots or alt accounts meant to form some flavor of farm. It would also be nice to then be able to up the RCs to the legit users so they can function until they have enough on their own. By knocking down spam, we've effectively cut off the new users ability to do anything, and since they can't really do anything, they can't really complain about it effectively, so then most people think everything is just fine when there's a growing, ongoing issue that will need to be resolved at some point, rather than being oblivious to it or ignoring it.</p>","appDepth":2,"appParentPermlink":"f3wwaydhq","appParentAuthor":"groynes","musingAppId":"aU2p3C3a8N","musingAppVersion":"1.1","musingPostType":"answer","tags":["musing-threads"]}" |
created | 2019-04-21 02:42:51 |
last_update | 2019-04-21 02:43:57 |
depth | 2 |
children | 4 |
last_payout | 2019-04-28 02:42:51 |
cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
total_payout_value | 0.594 HBD |
curator_payout_value | 0.196 HBD |
pending_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
promoted | 0.000 HBD |
body_length | 2,290 |
author_reputation | 123,853,032,378,097 |
root_title | "Musing Posts" |
beneficiaries | [] |
max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
percent_hbd | 10,000 |
post_id | 83,475,934 |
net_rshares | 1,552,491,217,169 |
author_curate_reward | "" |
voter | weight | wgt% | rshares | pct | time |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
fbook | 0 | 440,871,833 | 5% | ||
musing | 0 | 1,552,050,345,336 | 50% |
Off topic: Oh I see so that's how you do the musing answers. So the link to the musing answer should be removed too? Or can I just leave it in and it still won't be considered as a duplicate?
author | artgirl |
---|---|
permlink | re-glenalbrethsen-p36ag5l7q-20190423t041108969z |
category | musing-threads |
json_metadata | {"tags":["musing-threads"],"app":"steemit/0.1"} |
created | 2019-04-23 04:11:12 |
last_update | 2019-04-23 04:12:33 |
depth | 3 |
children | 3 |
last_payout | 2019-04-30 04:11:12 |
cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
total_payout_value | 0.015 HBD |
curator_payout_value | 0.005 HBD |
pending_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
promoted | 0.000 HBD |
body_length | 192 |
author_reputation | 78,655,728,560,489 |
root_title | "Musing Posts" |
beneficiaries | [] |
max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
percent_hbd | 10,000 |
post_id | 83,592,651 |
net_rshares | 42,539,453,381 |
author_curate_reward | "" |
voter | weight | wgt% | rshares | pct | time |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
glenalbrethsen | 0 | 42,539,453,381 | 18% |
Hey, @artgirl. I don't know how @abh12345 will treat the link. A while back when other apps like partiko started leaving their little "using partiko" blurbs that he adjusted the character length count for it. I'm not sure how that's happening now. I've been removing it simply because no one's going to go to musing to read my comment if they're already reading it on Steemit, and since I didn't write the link, it's not really my CL. So, I don't know if there's a right or wrong way here. Maybe Asher will provide a preference. Otherwise, I say, do what you feel best. That's what I've been doing. :) Either way, somehow it's not being counted as a duplicate when Asher goes to pull the list. I've been keeping track of total comments for a long time, and most weeks, we're either dead on, or within a couple of comments of each other. I think because the answer written on Musing generates a comment, but only as a link on STEEM, it doesn't duplicate even though you're copying and pasting the words from your answer on Musing. So, as long as you don't create a new comment, there won't be a duplicate, even if the link is left.
author | glenalbrethsen |
---|---|
permlink | re-artgirl-re-glenalbrethsen-p36ag5l7q-20190423t042114570z |
category | musing-threads |
json_metadata | {"tags":["musing-threads"],"users":["artgirl","abh12345"],"app":"steemit/0.1"} |
created | 2019-04-23 04:21:15 |
last_update | 2019-04-23 04:21:15 |
depth | 4 |
children | 2 |
last_payout | 2019-04-30 04:21:15 |
cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
total_payout_value | 0.018 HBD |
curator_payout_value | 0.005 HBD |
pending_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
promoted | 0.000 HBD |
body_length | 1,135 |
author_reputation | 123,853,032,378,097 |
root_title | "Musing Posts" |
beneficiaries | [] |
max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
percent_hbd | 10,000 |
post_id | 83,593,081 |
net_rshares | 50,327,196,480 |
author_curate_reward | "" |
voter | weight | wgt% | rshares | pct | time |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
abh12345 | 0 | 44,512,834,258 | 8% | ||
dustbunny | 0 | 5,814,362,222 | 1.84% |
<a href="https://musing.io/q/groynes/how-effective-resource-credit-is-in-keeping-spam-in-check-in-steem-ecosystem">View this answer on Musing.io</a>
author | resuscitate |
---|---|
permlink | f3j5lp8hw |
category | musing-threads |
json_metadata | "{"app":"musing/1.1","appTags":["Steem","steemit"],"appCategory":"Steem","appTitle":"How effective resource credit is in keeping spam in check in steem ecosystem?","appBody":"<p>Resource credit introduction into steem ecosystem may have reduced spamming from the smaller accounts or small guys, it has given the big accounts spammers more opportunity to keep spamming. Before Resource credit introduction, someone can create multiple accounts for the purpose of spamming and RC introduction has been able to limit this. But if you look at it closely, you'll discover that some of those people creating multiple accounts in order to spam in the system are actually big guys. So with the introduction of RC, all they have to do in order for them to continue spamming is just to delegate steem to their various spamming accounts from one of their big accounts and continue as usual. </p><p>It's the smaller spammers that RC has truly succeeded in limiting their spamming activities on the platform. Though RC introduction has also limited the number of genuine new sign up on the platform and engagement from genuine smaller accounts. </p>","appDepth":2,"appParentPermlink":"f3wwaydhq","appParentAuthor":"groynes","musingAppId":"aU2p3C3a8N","musingAppVersion":"1.1","musingPostType":"answer"}" |
created | 2019-04-20 11:08:39 |
last_update | 2019-04-20 11:08:39 |
depth | 2 |
children | 0 |
last_payout | 2019-04-27 11:08:39 |
cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
total_payout_value | 0.617 HBD |
curator_payout_value | 0.203 HBD |
pending_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
promoted | 0.000 HBD |
body_length | 148 |
author_reputation | 7,343,579,721,452 |
root_title | "Musing Posts" |
beneficiaries | [] |
max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
percent_hbd | 10,000 |
post_id | 83,433,993 |
net_rshares | 1,532,918,540,428 |
author_curate_reward | "" |
voter | weight | wgt% | rshares | pct | time |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
igram | 0 | 395,892,760 | 5% | ||
ezravandi | 0 | 3,055,223,138 | 1% | ||
musing | 0 | 1,529,467,424,530 | 50% |
<a href="https://musing.io/q/groynes/how-effective-resource-credit-is-in-keeping-spam-in-check-in-steem-ecosystem">View this answer on Musing.io</a>
author | whyaskwhy |
---|---|
permlink | pkr6jw87q |
category | musing-threads |
json_metadata | "{"app":"musing/1.1","appTags":["Steem","steemit"],"appCategory":"Steem","appTitle":"How effective resource credit is in keeping spam in check in steem ecosystem?","appBody":"<p>While resource credits RC are sparringly allocated to reduce spam Within smeetvile, it will be puerile to adopt their potency in stemming spams!!</p><p>Resource Credits are Credited according to account level of financial Investment , rather than ability to create quality blog contents. Thus new bloggers with value, because they are allocated meagre RC, they can't express their expertise while their counterpart with heavy investments in steemit , but without blog value will continue to inundate steemit illegal with poor and substandard posts!! More unfortunately, because of their high SP , they would continue to Upvote their poor contents to cash out the best SD for their poor posts!!</p><p>So, while the intention is wellcomed,small but competent accounts should be identified and encouraged with more RCs , even as they are rewarded by upvoted to encourage them!!</p>","appDepth":2,"appParentPermlink":"f3wwaydhq","appParentAuthor":"groynes","musingAppId":"aU2p3C3a8N","musingAppVersion":"1.1","musingPostType":"answer"}" |
created | 2019-04-20 09:10:03 |
last_update | 2019-04-20 09:10:03 |
depth | 2 |
children | 0 |
last_payout | 2019-04-27 09:10:03 |
cashout_time | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 |
total_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
curator_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
pending_payout_value | 0.000 HBD |
promoted | 0.000 HBD |
body_length | 148 |
author_reputation | 2,948,105,303,367 |
root_title | "Musing Posts" |
beneficiaries | [] |
max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
percent_hbd | 10,000 |
post_id | 83,429,329 |
net_rshares | 1,007,065,879 |
author_curate_reward | "" |
voter | weight | wgt% | rshares | pct | time |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
fbook | 0 | 440,843,867 | 5% | ||
whyaskwhy | 0 | 566,222,012 | 100% |