@ecosynthesizer / @symbionts stop creating fake accounts https://blurtlatam.intinte.org/created/ecs
All your posts are AI-generated crap, (including images), uploaded to the blockchain by automated posting bot
Why is @blurtbooster upvoting this?
You are the biggest abuser of this blockchain who is additionally rewarded by Blurt DAO (because @megadrive wants it that way)
https://ecosynthesizer.com/blurt/@symbionts.pay
What can we do?
Unvote Combined Proposals Initiative by symbionts for symbionts.pay and approve Blurt.one Infrastructure, Development and maintenance Costs proposal by blurt.one for blurt.one
Anyone who wants an upvote from blurtbooster should prove they are a real person
Fork out Blurt DAO asap
Increase posting fees
Posted from https://blurtlatam.intinte.org
Proving you're human doesn't change the vote.
I've done it more than once.
On instagram, where I have 50,000 followers.
But let's hope for the best, thanks to people like you, maybe something will change here.
did they remove you from blurtbooster whitelist?
Most likely.
Wouldn't it be because of the reuse of old post like the 2 below? 🤔
I’m offended it uses my name lol
Oh yeah, this profile looks real but like the rest of them it has the #ecs (ecosynthesizer ) tag (they forgot to remove this tag from post template in the bot), it is also upvoted by ecosynthesizer - symbionts, just like the other posts of this farm (they are always upvoting own posts only)
Re🤬eD
DOUBLE the Posting fees!
STAT 🥓
Hi, @mariuszkarowski,
1- Those are actually people that we are trying to onboard. We have already asked them to do introduction posts for more transparency. It is already a miracle, considering the current price of BLURT and the few rewards they are generating, that they are still around posting.
2 – We decided to launch a community on Blurt but waiting for it to be implemented on Blurt.blog first. Which will hopefully focus all posts in one place.
3 – We are allowing AI-generated images, we don't see any issue with this. But generating text is forbidden.
4 – We are curating with our curation account. Blurt Booster does not have any functional relation with our curation.
Thank you,
Yeah, community for 10 bots. I've seen this kind of community on Blurt already https://blocks.blurtwallet.com/#/@upmewhale
I enjoyed reading your critical post. and at the same time afraid that this blockchain will not last for a long time.
We will survive after the changes I propose.
It's fine when you buy BLURT and upvote your own posts only, your stake, your choice. Moral problems start when you get 167 BLURT per hour for doing nothing + blurtbooster upvotes for your fake accounts. How should everyone else who buys BLURT feel like? A lot of people buying BLURT recently. They may feel cheated. That's why I'm in favor of closing Blurt DAO and voluntary account verification for those who want to receive upvotes from blurtbooster
Remember when you said to me about content not being the answer to the problems on blurt ? (roughly speaking).
You were correct, I was wrong.
Once bitcoin crashes - it will (it's baked into the 'quantitative easing pie' , one that needed liquidity of free money to go somewhere and away from precious metals) - then the rest will follow.
DPoS > POS > POW.....in this order (in my opinion)
Crypto currencies are here to stay, but it won't be in the form we recognize now (they will have to be tied to real world commodities - or die completely).
Dollar may collapse first, if this happen then bitcoin could be the fastest and most convenient way to save capital for those who have it (as long as government agendas don't "kill" bitcoin before dollar collapses).
In this logic, the delegation system should be removed from the Blurt blockchain, which would also solve the UPVU problem. On the other hand, it will be much harder for communities to emerge via the support of curation groups unless they are managed only by people who have acquired sufficient BLURT.
Nothing is ever perfect, and there will always be individuals who cheat, taking advantage of the fact that any action against them generates more or less collateral damage.
One of the main current weaknesses is the fact that the BLURT blockchain is small, with a restricted number of users, thus concentrating power. This is obvious when you look at governance votes not by weight but by volume.
Another is the low number of active devs and skilled techs, between those who have been demotivated and the non-existent number of new ones.
I don't know if you remember, but about 2 years ago we discussed this idea - me, double-u, ctime liked it and a fight with megadrive started, as a result of which double-u sold his BLURT and left. megadrive won't change anything, I bet he won't even withdraw his vote from symbionts proposal, he won't even fix proposal system
No, that would make things much easier. MD could stop blurtbooster and use your bot instead. He would set curators for every community and follow their upvotes
Btw, your bot after some changes would probably be able to check whether upvoted account is on COAL list or not
Two years ago, I was just an occasional user of the Blurt blockchain, only coming here as a blogger to post from time to time. I became genuinely interested in this blockchain a little over a year ago when I saw its potential and realized that some of my projects could find a good home here. Even if everything isn't perfect - because the perfect and magical world doesn't exist, just as you can't agree with everyone 100% - I've found some interesting ideas and features.
I looked into some discussions from that time, but not everything, as it seemed to be a very prolific period. I preferred to look towards the future rather than the past, although I acknowledge that the past also holds significance. From what I understood, there was a community movement, particularly from the German-speaking community, which was quite active on Blurt but a significant portion of which has since left. There was also a discussion about a tag called IDUVTS.
I do believe that supporting manual curators by community is a good direction to take.
In a few days, I should finally be able to dedicate more time to Blurt. I've been heavily occupied with one of my clients who found themselves in a critical situation requiring urgent development work. I hope to wrap up two major projects: a streamlined onboarding system with an affiliate program and support tools for those managing curation and community engagement.
BLURT is not perfect! But it does work for doing certain things better than what’s available. And it’s better than anything anyone else can come up with, with any amount of money, in any amount of time, AVAILABLE NOW!
(unsolicited comment)
P.S - if there is a spike in prices (bitcoin halving etc) - A prime time to liquidize any crypto assets - especially DPoS/POS....in my opinion....
Delegation should be a system for newcomers, where you can support them. I think that when you're delegating 10k Blurt for someone, it should be worth only 5k on this account.
I'm so happy to see you here and building Blurt. Hope you are always healthy.
I don't understand a lot of things here, until now. blurt has great potential to develop, but why isn't it happening? I know there is a mistake, but don't know where.
I really agree about volunteers to verify accounts (And volunteers to drive activities). This is very important for transparency. Apart from that, the blockchain ecosystem should share the difficulties and benefits obtained by many people.
*We also need people who can create a "narrative" to move the community
We had such people, it does not work. Anyone who is here should realize that they are on a decentralized blockchain that has good and bad actors. If bad actors start shaping the narrative then nothing good will come of it
you know better than me. Haha.
Narrative is meaningless if it is not balanced with other things~(Become; scammer).
Increasing posting fee is the wrong way.
Taxation is always a problem. Raising it doesn't affect the big fish: they spend more but
The smallest fishes and the newcomers: for them, however, the fee increase will mean an extra barrier to publishing posts and participating in a platform like this.
The only effect of raising fees will be to discourage the use of the platform by those who might start using it, and - consequently - reduce the growth of the ecosystem.
Third: I saw you regularly vote your self with a big vote power, so it seems to me you are not a so-innocent soul for the Blurt ecosystem, in the same matter of the ones you indicate in your post and - maybe - many other ones. I don't have anything against you, but it's certainly a bad way to search the "good health" of the ecosystem.
The "health" of the ecosystem - considering what happens on the platform - doesn't exist because there are too many people with great voting powers who vote themselves, resulting in an increase in the gap between large and small users. And this is a fact, independently of the motivation of all the various involved actors.
https://blurtseven.com/
nothing wrong with voting on your own posts, I assume you came here from Hive where such behavior is considered wrong. You should vote on your own posts. Higher fees won't stop ecs but can stop accounts like: @njrahman and several others
who?
if they don't spam then they will earn enough BLURT to pay fees
No: if the fees increase, the smallest fishes and the newcormers will spend more, and they will have a bigger harm than the big fish. If they want to spend, no problem, it is a choice, but they have to spend more: this is a fact.
The one I met on Hive and the one you are talking about are the same type of matter: personal policy, that various user wants to apply. The fact is: you receive votes by personal bots, or you vote your self, or you enter multiple voter accounts' circle: in any case of the mentioned, you are removing funds from the reward pool distribution. Personally, I don't have anything against this type of action if you don't receive reward, but it is a problem if you receive them and a big vote power is involved in this action, because, as I previously wrote, you remove tokens from the reward pool.
The percentage of self-vote is referred to the total votes. Sometimes I met your post, and sometimes I found your vote on your own posts.
The users who vote their self: on your posts, today and various ones I read in the past - sometimes - you mentioned a few of them, often involved in other practice your policy considers wrong. So, I imagine yours is a rhetorical phrase only.
To ending and closing discussion: I am not interested in argumentations, I only view the facts derived from everyone's action. I see this type of policy and see you or other ones with performing it. So, considering the function of the platform, I well-know that investing in Blurt is the way in which I will make rich the big fishes and not the common users; so, I will avoid spending value in it, if not my time only. That's it. I leave you a regard 🙂