Viewing a response to: @complexring/re-fuzzyvest-re-steemed-how-to-modify-steem-curation-such-that-voting-is-blind-20160601t003907532z
But this doesn't solve the auto-voting based on the author, which is I think the bigger problem here.
author | hr1 |
---|---|
permlink | re-complexring-re-fuzzyvest-re-steemed-how-to-modify-steem-curation-such-that-voting-is-blind-20160601t083441890z |
category | steem |
json_metadata | {} |
created | 2016-06-01 08:34:42 |
last_update | 2016-06-01 08:34:42 |
depth | 3 |
children | 1 |
last_payout | 2016-08-22 17:28:12 |
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 | 101 |
author_reputation | 7,226,856,136,834 |
root_title | "How to Modify Steem Curation Such that Voting is Blind" |
beneficiaries | [] |
max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
percent_hbd | 10,000 |
post_id | 20,332 |
net_rshares | 0 |
Is that really a problem? Why wouldn't a user want to maximize rewards based on the current schema? Everyone else knows the rules and are allowed to use whatever is at their disposal to 'play the game.' For the record, I only think an autovote bot is only good until the 4th of July. After that, a sophisticated suggestion algorithm will be better.
author | complexring |
---|---|
permlink | re-hr1-re-complexring-re-fuzzyvest-re-steemed-how-to-modify-steem-curation-such-that-voting-is-blind-20160601t121244061z |
category | steem |
json_metadata | {} |
created | 2016-06-01 12:12:42 |
last_update | 2016-06-01 12:12:42 |
depth | 4 |
children | 0 |
last_payout | 2016-08-22 17:28:12 |
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 | 353 |
author_reputation | 62,649,292,215,598 |
root_title | "How to Modify Steem Curation Such that Voting is Blind" |
beneficiaries | [] |
max_accepted_payout | 1,000,000.000 HBD |
percent_hbd | 10,000 |
post_id | 20,501 |
net_rshares | 0 |