It's pretty much what the title says. I'm not even sure why the four per day limit was removed in the first place.
I'm not sure whether the limit should be one per day, four per day, two per day, or whatever the fuck per day, but I think it's been obvious since the removal of the limit that it was a bad call.
Ever since the removal of the limit, we've seen an astronomical rise in spam on Steemit, and I don't feel it serves the interests of the platform to cater to this sort of gaming of the system.
Right now, the problem is criticizing spamming, as well as the self votes that go along with it, is that people will always point out to two things:
- The code allows it
- It's a stake based platform, so therefore people are allowed to do whatever the fuck
People can flag whatever they consider to be bad behavior, but due to the lack of an incentive to flag, most users aren't willing to take that route, and will rather just protect their own interests and do their own thing. It's just human behavior, it's understandable.
So, since the code currently allows one to post a hundred times per day and then self vote those posts to big rewards, I find that the solution is to simply change the code.
If posts that get rewarded were limited to, say, one per day, it would be the same, even playground for everybody. It would simply be how the code is, and that would be that.
It would still be a stake based platform, and people would be allowed to use their stake however they see fit, within the rules of the game.
The thing about people is that people always find ways around rules and laws; there has never been a system invented that didn't have loopholes, and those exploiting said loopholes.
No system is perfect, but perfecting a system has a lot to do with closing out as many loopholes as possible.
Right now, if someone posts a hundred times per day and has the sufficient SP - or a whale autovote or two - to rake in huge rewards every time, who can blame that person? Who can honestly blame someone for seeing an opportunity to make money for himself, and taking advantage of that?
It sucks for the rest of the community, but that's life. That's how people are. And no amount of community frowning will ever change that.
The only thing that can change that is altering the code.
So, I suggest limiting the amount of posts that one can post per day that can get rewarded.
Say the limit is one.
A user can post however many times he wishes during a 24 hour period, but only one post during that time period will be able to get rewarded.
It can also be two, or three, or whatever like I said, but this is about the idea itself.
Why would anyone object to this? Other than the people currently benefiting from being allowed to spam like there's no tomorrow?
Like I said in my post about flagging, the reward pool is not about you. It's never about one single user, it's about the community as a whole.
And Steemit is not supposed to be your job. If you can make money off of Steemit, good, but Steemit was never supposed to be your own personal BI that you can just abuse to your liking.
And it serves every STEEM holders interests in the long term that the platform is as successful as it can be, and as "fair" as it can be, so that it can attract good quality users. Yes, in the short term you can make a buck by spamming, but in the long term - if anyone even fucking cares about it at this point - making the site itself the best it can be serves everybody the most.
I say good quality users on purpose, since the point is not to attract just a big number of users, the most of which will only join in hopes of some easy quick bucks.
No, Steemit needs good quality users, and the problem with a scammy atmosphere is that it drives those good quality users away; people with at least an adequate IQ tend to see a scammy platform, leave and never look back.
And above when I said "fair", I should clarify what I meant.
I don't mean "fair" as in everybody makes the same amount; I mean "fair" as in it's as even a playing field as possible for everyone involved, with the rest being up to you.
So, since the limit would apply to everyone, it would be fair by default, and no one should have a reason to complain or whine about it.
I think this would be a more sufficient way to deal with the problem of spam, instead of a few big users singling about a few abusers.
Let's just change the rules that would improve the problem.