pull down to refresh

75 sats \ 27 replies \ @optimism 15 Sep \ parent \ on: Stacker Saloon

I saw a bot make 6k this morning.

write
compose
22 sats \ 19 replies \ @SimpleStacker 15 Sep

how did you see a bot make 6k?

reply
22 sats \ 18 replies \ @optimism 15 Sep

Identify a bot. See it get zapped 6k

reply
22 sats \ 17 replies \ @SimpleStacker 15 Sep

which post?

reply
40 sats \ 15 replies \ @optimism 15 Sep

After checking top comments. It was 5.2k

reply
22 sats \ 13 replies \ @SimpleStacker 15 Sep

i'm guessing it's this one? #1572215

I for one have fewer moral qualms about linking to a bot post haha

reply
258 sats \ 10 replies \ @harlock 15 Sep

Yo, that post is mine, and I'm not a bot. Sorry if it seemed like it. My bad, I probably should have posted the content instead of just dropping the link to my blog. I'm new to SN.

reply
1 sat \ 5 replies \ @SimpleStacker 15 Sep

sorry not specifically trying to accuse you either, just speculating

reply
137 sats \ 4 replies \ @optimism 15 Sep

Hint for Mr Simple: I said the word comment <3

view all 4 replies
153 sats \ 2 replies \ @Natalia 15 Sep

You could have interacted with stackers, not just shared posts like that, because this is what bots usually do to farm sats.

Sorry for thinking that you were a bot.

reply
101 sats \ 1 reply \ @optimism 15 Sep

Its a very hard post to interact with. I haven't been able to even grasp that article yet. Nor do I have the mental bandwidth to do that anytime soon.

view all 1 replies
101 sats \ 0 replies \ @optimism 15 Sep

Nope they just linked the wrong post.

reply
126 sats \ 1 reply \ @Natalia 15 Sep

now the bot knows that we are talking about it.

reply
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @optimism 15 Sep

Its OK no one confirmed or denied anything haha

reply
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @Natalia 15 Sep

found it, not 5.5?

reply
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @optimism 15 Sep

One I won't link ever haha (there's only one of those today)

reply
166 sats \ 6 replies \ @Natalia 15 Sep

when team @sn will do something?

reply
161 sats \ 5 replies \ @optimism 15 Sep

that's the wrong question, imho. I brought this up last time too.

There are 2 solutions to this:

  1. SN change
  2. Stacker behavior change

Every single time, stackers call for k00b to do something. But, that is even weaker sauce than the weak sauce of actual bitcoiners being so degenerate that they need handouts.

reply
398 sats \ 2 replies \ @Natalia 15 Sep

Hmmmm, SN can change the algo; Stackers' behavior could change too, but most stackers' behavior mostly affected by the rewards from what I observed, you remember how draining it was during the mad march thing?

reply
225 sats \ 0 replies \ @optimism 15 Sep

No, because I was a lurker back then.

If stacker's behavior is most affected by rewards (plausible) then we need more chads and less losers.

reply
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @supratic 16 Sep -125 sats

past not gonna come back, it never did. would you like to see real https://stasher.news/transparency? shame it works with different currency

1 sat \ 0 replies \ @supratic 16 Sep

The other option is to make the reward distribution public, so stackers will know who is providing value and who are the assmilkers suckers.

reply
1 sat \ 0 replies \ @supratic 15 Sep

remove the rewards, problem solved.

reply