That can’t be true because of Opidia gets a full vote on every single post and she has increadibly low up votes, comments and engagement. On the other hand someone like me who has a lot of engagement gets zero votes from blurtbooster.
RE: Blurtbooster
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Blurtbooster
No problem with lying yet again. Liars gonna lie.
A full vote would be 100%, I just checked she gets 9%, she has been studying blurtbooster vote patterns and tweaking her post/profile accordingly, she’s done the homework to optimise the votes she gets.
What by copying and posting the exact same post every day LOL? If anything that should trigger spam. Well TravelPro has a lot invested in the site and Writes a nice long post and gets like 1% from blurtbooster. I really actually don’t care that much it’s the principle.
The principle, says the despicable liar who lied all through this post, claiming its opedia, claiming she gets full votes on all her posts, and now saying she doesn't care that much, its a matter of principle, which if true, means you rate principles as Meh. If false, it means you lying is a principle, and that's the extent of principles for you, a deranged walking lying contradiction.
Blurtbooster doesn’t evaluate the content itself, it relies on metrics it can measure, it filters out most spam accounts this way the rest has to be manually adjusted.
Well somebody has either given her the account to manage or is totally allowing this to happen and turning a blind eye because it is actually spam to just paste the same thing over and over again every single day with a different meme taken from the Internet most likely. I really don’t care because I get decent up votes and have good support but how do you think somebody feels that doesn’t and is watching somebody just completely spam blurt and get high up votes from a blurt official curation bot while they get 40 c for genuine content. I mean this is literally the definition of spamming and it’s getting the biggest support from an official blurt blog curation account. It defo needs to filter out spamming accounts.
I find your reasoning inconclusive. Why do you care when you say you don't care because you yourself see your content well supported? You take the argument that you care about the less popular and weak in a system, but that is not reflected in how you perform here. You are interested in politics and want to participate in it. So far so good. Then stand up for it.
But don't pretend that you want to give the poor or disadvantaged a piece of the big pie if you can't be seen in it with your own deeds. Then why don't you go around, actively, intensively, continuously and for all to see, looking for little commented or voted blog posts and award your votes or write feedback in the comments? On the whole, you can be seen on the big and much discussed topics and posts.
If you were really interested in something different, why don't you start a community project that promotes the unknown or underrated blogs? Why do you expect others to do this work for you when you could just as easily do it yourself? The big guys here seem to be much more concerned with defending themselves against attacks, hostile takeovers, etc. than with curating or setting up specialist or hobby groups. They simply don't have the time to take care of everything.
If you are annoyed by an Opidia, go and talk TO her instead of ABOUT her. Deal with her personally, make the effort and debate with her and tell her that her content sucks. Then see how far you get with that. It could be said about you as well that you have your proteges and mentors, how is that any different from her? Just because you say some are from management and others are "just" users? Since when is someone just a user when they hold millions of stakes and can very well have a big impact on the life or survival of the blockchain?
It was someone else that suggested it going to new accounts not me and I agreed momentarily but then said maybe it won’t work though as everyone will just start loads of new accounts etc
I think if it was actually my choice I would have it as more of a fund to help people who are putting time into either promoting blurt, people who do meetups, people who make engaging posts but that probably takes time and someone to manage so maybe everyone should just get a tiny percentage. I like fairness. I don’t like to see one person spamming the same message every day and getting the highest vote I’ve seen from it every day no.
Personally I don’t always have time to go searching for smaller content especially as my vote is 3 c so makes zero difference to them anyways, I would do it more if it was like a dollar or something, but when I have days with more time I defo do go and look for it a bit, it is easy to get in a rut with going down your own feed tho or the top of trending for sure. But a bot for the platform is supposed to be a bit more fair, I see that more like a government fund, that is supposed to have everyone’s needs in mind.
There is no discussion with opidia she came along and commented on my post so she opened up engagement. I don’t agree with how she uses the platform and she already knows this. She’s not going to change nor does she have to cause she’s free to use it how she wants. She has the right to spam the same post every day and self upvote and I get the right to say I think that’s the lowest use of the platform and others can disagree with me and say she’s adding value by adding money. Everyone has free right to have their own thoughts. But I definitely do not believe she should be getting higher bot payouts than people really spending time here or people who need it more. Either or. I would rather the witnesses get even who are putting time in and don’t get much £ for it atm. Or give it to developers.
I did wrongly assume she might have been involved in programming it cause she seemed to get such high votes and the people she doesn’t like got none lol but I think it might have been coincidence I’ll admit when I am wrong.
...That's why others should "be a bit fairer" than you are? Because you "don't have time" and because your vote "isn't worth anything"? That is shallow and shows how little you really care about the "little ones" and "newbies" and "disadvantaged". If you cared, the value of your upvote would not be a reason to abstain.
You don't seem to be able to use your high profile status to support all these underpaid bloggers by actively re-blogging them, making engaging comments in a positive way to motivate all these here. You throw around assumptions and then when they turn out to be wrong, you just laugh? And just jump away with a light heart? Hahaha? I come to the conclusion that for the moment there is no point in talking to you further about this issue.
I tell you that this attitude of "Oh darling, I didn't mean it that way and in reality it's not as serious as it might sound" is not a good idea.
I never profess to be some kind of blurt hero lol but I have definitely gone out of my way to support accounts I think are undervalued or new many times. I sometimes have more time than others right now I’m running Market’s so I tend to just drop on post upvOte a couple of things not to waste my vote and drop out. On periods when I have more time I put more effort in as I’m sure @world-travel-pro and @outofthematrix can attest to. I never pretend to be a charity worker but I do what I feel drawn to do.
I never really said I go around suporting newbies. I literally just agreed with a guy that it would be fairer than giving high votes to someone spamming the same post every single day. I never really have pretended to be someone who personally feels it is their mission to upvote small reward content with 3 c. Please show me where I’ve said this and I’ll appologise for saying something incorrectly as I’ve never felt it’s my thing. I have rly highlighted peoples posts though. I’ve made about 5 posts for @hangin trying to alert people to his posts cause I think they are amazing and under rewarded. I’ve not only reshared tons I’ve made posts and tagged in bigger accounts who have gone and supported him. If I help anyone it’s in that way rather than spending hours looking for new accounts and giving them about 2 pence which even in the poorest countries makes absolutely no difference. If I want to help an account that I think deserves it the best I can do is try and draw attention to it. I’ve done it with several accounts now over time when I have a bit more time on my hands. I’ve actually done this several times and reshared quite a lot of work from people I think are undervalued and even spent hours of my time organising a local blurt meetup and a quiz where I gave people prizes out of my own pocket.
I mean that is my personality I’m just a bit firey in a debate and don’t mind people that do it back. But I do stay on topic and after the debate can be back to total normal with the person, no grudges unless I generally don’t connect to them at all over a longer period of time. If I’m wrong I’ll just admit it like I did laugh and move on cause what the hell is the point of holding onto it? What would you rather I did deny it if I realise I’m wrong? Cry and beg for forgiveness. We are human, sometimes we are wrong and I think it’s best just to admit it and laugh and move on. Life’s too short. If you want to handle things different feel free to not engage. You come to my posts and comments a lot to engage, it’s optional.
Whether you would rather someone else (not you) get rewarded for their efforts or not is not your business after all, it is the business of those who feel underpaid or under-rewarded. If they want more, then they go to those who can give them more and offer themselves, make suggestions or do it indirectly by simply posting their content. Both is possible. But the reverse is true: "Standing up for others" is only possible if you select those who, in your eyes, deliver good content or do their work in the backends and frontends and you trust them and support them by vote. But you don't actively support anyone when you express an opinion, when you speak out against so-called content that you consider to be spam, because that makes you look envious. It seems to go against the grain for you, so create a police force here, like they did on Hive, to punish and downvote spam content and ask the big guys (founders or whales) to fund you because you have work to do tracking down and calling attention to such spam content or advocate for the introduction of a downvote button. That's how it was designed there "against each other". You noticed that and left. Maybe you wouldn't find it as bad as you always say? Maybe you were just pissed off not to be on the wanted side of things that time, but on the unwanted side?
You said in our past conversations you don't mind majority voting, so try to get a majority here to stop so-called spammers getting upvotes from the community (big and small voters). Have fun with this task.
I would like to state one thing about this topic: You can't agree on quality. It is impossible. Can you accept that or not? If you continue to think there is something like a consensus on the quality of individual blog posts, you won't be happy anywhere, neither on Steemit, nor Hive, nor here. Some people like the easy consumption of meme-postings, I personally know one on hive (antisocialist) who also does it on regular basis. I befriended myself with him and I found his memes quite votable (when I was still active there and remembered visiting his blog).
It is my business lol we can have an opinion on anything we want. The point of freedom of speech is that I am free to say it but no one has to listen.
I completely stand by my opinion that I think opidia does not deserve a high blurt bot upvote for sharing the exact same post every single day. I think if it was someone else like @LucyLin they would probably be on some spam list by now tbh for doing that. There is one thing a friend of hers upvoting cause they have an arrangement but the blurt booster is kind of like a government payout I guess. It’s sort of a basic income so then it becomes more important it’s fair than for who you or I vote for. ‘IMO’ which I am allowed to have an opinion and you are allowed to disagree.
Quality is one thing, but this bot claims to actually be votIng on quality lol yet it’s somehow giving someone one of the highest rewards for just posting the same thing every day. If it was a different post and I just didn’t like it every day, no issue.... but to keep sharing the exact same thing every day isn’t about personal taste it’s clearly spam.
I don’t mind majority voting but to get an idea of what a majority is you need to express an opinion lol. If every single person disagrees with me and thinks someone posting the exact same post ever single day deserves the highest blurt booster payout then I’ll disagree but accept that reality cause most people think it’s fair. Right now I don’t know what everyone thinks. Do you? What makes you think your in a majority?
Tbh I have scrolled all through the comments here and I think the majority don’t think blurtbooster is currently fair. So being in the minority are you happy to just support the push to change the algorithms?
I post my own stuff and engage properly with other people on the site. People might hate it that’s ok, some ppl might think my content or comments are total shit and that’s ok but they can’t call it spam. Spamming is just sharing the same thing over and over again. It isn’t about personal taste it’s something universally accepted as adding no value. Sharing something others like or hate is preference. If it was just posts I didn’t like it wouldn’t be the same issue as actual spam, that would just be preference.
So principle, as long as you're benefitting it bothers you none. BTW, keep lying:
I genuinely assumed it must be her managing it. If it’s just that people haven’t noticed she’s doing that then my apologies but I hope it will be fixed quickly because that’s an awful thing for people that are struggling to get upvotes here to see.
Sarah you kind of assume everything and end up with the wrong idea. Blurtbooster is a bot and no human manages it.
You kind of make yourself look like a fool everytime by assuming things. Sorry but I had to say this. Your obsession with Opidia is not healthy and you kind of see her everywhere.
Blurtbooster is a bot that is run by the team and no one looks at the posts or the topics.
There are parameters that are checked by Blurtbooster and it votes every post.
It excludes users who are in COAL list.
You assume that users are not getting votes but that's not the responsibility of the Blurt team. The team can give one random vote to a user and can't give them 100 votes from hundred accounts.
Users need to make friends, comment, write engaging content and interact with others to gain attention.
Users can't just write one post and vanish only to return a few days later to write another post.
And the bot is a work in progress. It takes time and experimentation to perfect a bot but there will never be a perfect bot.
There are tens of curation accounts and they are doing their best to help users.
Curation must be a community effort.
I agree with you a little on the new accounts I also said that above when someone suggested it that actually that’s kind of flawed cause as nice as it sounds ppl can just set up 100 accounts etc. It seems if people can find a way to manipulate a system they always will. 😅
I haven’t mentioned Opedia for months so not obsessed but not right that someone literally spamming is the only one that seems to be getting good upvotes from this blurt bot. I don’t care myself happy to not take it and give it to newbies and people who rly need it, defo not to someone spamming tho. I may be wrong that she isn’t controlling it, it just seemed very dodgy but someone is turning a blind eye that’s for sure.
Literally spamming doesn't mean what you think it does. I think you called her out a half dozen times at least..
Which account are you referring to, I don’t keep an eye on individual account happenings I focus on Blurt at a macro level.
The opidia account is getting one of the highest upvotes from blurt booster when all it does is repost the exact same text with a new image every day and self upvote. I know we don’t have an issue with self upvoting here but I don’t think these are th types of accounts deserving of some extra boosting lol. I did wrongly assume she must have had some kind of access to it due to getting such high upvotes and the people she doesn’t like getting none and her making a comment about that but I think from talking to Imran it was just coincidence so happy to accept being wrong on that and jumping to the wrong conclusion. But it definitely needs a little rewiring.
No special treatment, nor does she have the keys, she has been very focussed on trying to optimise for it, I think she’s spoken to every member of the team to try find out how Blurtbooster works, watching how it votes etc. I was as vague as possible like I was with you giving the tip to increase your word count, maybf she got one piece of info from each of the team. If you spent that much time on it i’m sure you would get those votes too, but perhaps the votes should be capped to maybe 5% per user what do you think?