The creator pad algorithm lacks human common sense, why do I say this? Due to the autofarming or false engagement that has been seen in the last 3 creator pad campaigns I participated in. I had been absent because I didn't think the old algorithm was fair, and I saw that many colleagues returned in the campaign of $ROBO and they did well.
However, I have been very curious and go beyond many things, the drop that overflowed the cup was in the Sign Protocol campaign where a group of users shamelessly and disrespectfully self-farmed likes and comments, and that is where the algorithm validates that interaction.
I expressed my opinion in an X post exposing users who copied each other’s posts that earned many points, I tried that strategy and did not get the same results as them, so what’s happening? Sounds strange, right?
That post generated a lot of controversy that even the 2 users went to respond with excuses, many comments in favor of my claim really. And what happened? Nothing in the new campaign of @Pixels , it remains the same and I am going to show you with bases the difference of a natural engagement boosted by the same algorithm vs the one organized by communities that those users have on Twitter (I have an insider who gave me that data)
Artificial Likes & Comments
It’s not bad to help or interact with posts from participants in the campaign; it’s something normal, but being glued for many hours in square giving likes and comments to get them back is already autofarming.
What is normal to happen when posting your article? Binance square boosts your content based on whether they like it and quality writing, etc. And this is shown in your feed first and that’s where organic engagement is obtained, because commonly this type of interaction is seen in trading signal posts where people feel attracted to comment and give likes, but tell me who is going to have more than 100 comments on a Pixel post if we already know it’s a mature game with a good reputation, that’s where the false engagement comes in.
I was comparing the users of both leaderboards Global vs Chinese, and the difference is astounding; in the Chinese leaderboard, the assignment of points for posts that don’t even reach 1000 views and with less than 20 likes is seen much more naturally in the top 100
In contrast, the Global is a disaster, and it’s so simple anyone can realize that, and they do nothing?
The question is, is the Pixel game paying for a global campaign for 200 people to like and comment among themselves? Is that the true reach for the game or Dapp to expand? You have to think like the client too, which in this case are the projects that are launched in Creator Pad.
The same Pattern of the Organized Community
Now, let’s look at the pattern or common factor of this group of people who organizedly spend more than 12 hours commenting and giving likes to other users, and well, due to consistency, it could be that the users who send their posts in groups from external platforms (you will see something regarding that later)
In that image, I collected some profiles that have that pattern, I could spend all day doing it and the result is the same, what you see there is more than 100 likes almost all and more than 200 comments, because it’s a job of commenting on other publications apart from the same ones of your post or article to deceive the algorithm and they do it well because they are at the top of the global, enter yourselves and see those profiles their common posts on another topic don’t reach 20 likes or 1000 views.
And the algorithm is deceived because upon seeing the false interaction at the beginning of publishing it itself gives a boost in views, and that’s why they see elevated views (note that views cannot be autofarmed, they are granted by Binance)
In that compilation, you can clearly see the autofarming of comments and likes, while I was collecting information from users in the top 100, I was able to see some who earned over 180 points in 2 days with posts or articles with few likes and comments, where what those people wrote was taken into account. Of course, most users in the top are autofarming, spending hours simply giving likes and commenting, and my question returns: doesn’t anyone realize that? Am I the only one? Why does nobody do anything about it? Internal reports are made in square and the response is 'we did not find anything that violates the rules'
Points assigned legally
Here a debate opens up, because many in past campaigns complained about users without likes, few followers being granted a good amount of points, it’s relative but here the responsibility is already with the square team and the algorithm, perhaps the content made by AI is valuable and pleasing, for example, these users for me got their points due to the quality of their posts, this user by the end of April 16th was number 20 in the Leaderboard with 180 points in just 2 days, meaning they must have been given more than 80 or 90 global points on April 16th.
Now we see another scenario, user No. 21 few likes and views and is with a good score and the rest of his publications are similar, now the question I see something peculiar the user is Chinese his description is Asian, I don’t know if that will be taken into account for that, since that’s another topic the preference with Chinese users
What do smart users do?
Those who are smart and clever to hide the autofarming they do, hide from their profile the response section which is what exposes their activity to the public, for example, this user in the Sign protocol campaign won among the top 3 worldwide in autofarming haha
External Auto Farm Groups
I always suspected this, since it’s always the same people who really comment on each other, some used the internal Binance groups (very absurd), they realized and moved to external platforms where they send their links and the more than 150 users religiously go and comment and give likes... Deceiving the innocent algorithm, so to speak
I have several friends and insiders from these communities helping me find the origin of this disaster, and this is the result of the investigation finding the group on external networks where they do it, this may be one of them; there must be many more.
The idea is for the algorithm to automatically detect when this anomaly occurs and disqualify those accounts, which is very visible to everyone.
The other side of the coin, Chinese Leaderboard🚀
Let’s go to the other side of the planet! Chinaaaaa... how things are managed there apparently more fairly and clearly since they have an event just for them, regarding the topic I mentioned a couple of paragraphs ago, anyway, here looking at each profile that is on the leaderboard is organic interaction, few likes, few comments, and views and they have decent points, so to speak, around 50 for each post, which is reasonable since the maximum is 100 points for each one, until now I haven’t noticed anyone who achieved that.
I spent some time looking at each Chinese profile and really they don’t have much interaction among themselves, nor likes most of the time and views super poor, in quotes fair the assignment of points due to the quality of content and not due to the autofarming seen in the Global section.
For example, look at those posts, God!! there’s one that has neither likes nor comments and only 65 views and is in the top 5 with 180 points, it must be a really good article to get that and there the execution of the algorithm is somewhat valid, and there are many, many like that, I want to say that in China things are more natural; everyone posts their own thing about pixels and forgets, they start trading and by their ingenuity or creativity earn points which is more in favor of the Creator Pad regulations.
The challenge I pose to the organized community
If you really spend hours writing each article, post, researching whitepapers, news about pixels, and go beyond, I propose that those people stop wasting time looking for likes from others to deceive the algorithm, because if you trust what you write you shouldn’t have problems, you would get the same points without the artificial interaction you do.
The end of all this
It’s simple that Creator Pad be an attractive, fair, and reliable section so that many elite creators return to write about the projects you indicate every 15 days, and it’s true many have stopped writing about this type of campaigns due to the injustice, especially users from the Genesis era of Binance Square founders who are recognized on external platforms.
Now those who lead Creator Pad are the hunters of red envelopes who organized themselves in the style of traditional social networks to have false interaction.
A message for the Dapps that hire Creator Pad
You, by forming alliances for your projects to be visible and gain more popularity on the largest exchange on the planet, you want that, right? For more people to interact with your protocols, games, tokens, etc.
Or do they pay to create campaigns for a group of about 200 or 300 people to have organized false interaction? That’s not marketing, says the theory.
So I leave that reflection
It’s time to conclude
I expressed and I am the voice of many KOLs who for fear do not dare to write about what is happening in Creator Pad, all that frustrates investigating, writing, creating unique images, reading to write posts or articles and not getting anything in return? And when you investigate thoroughly you see people with little knowledge or recognition in the blockchain world taking all the glory creating posts full of AI and false interaction.
Well, I want Binance Square to be a fair and clean site, I have been within Binance for over 6 years and I have seen it grow and what is happening I don’t like!
Greetings from your friend RoYoK
P.S: I await the haters to respond hahaha
