I don't see a strong argument for limiting the time I should promote my post or upvote my own post for that matter. you're suggesting that people who promote late, are also spammers or putting out shoddy content for profit. If they make profit that way, that's their choice. Who is to say what is shoddy content? The answer is - everyone gets to say. But to allow, encourage and argue for bullying by powerful accounts which don't bother to even manually evaluate the content - merely slap a flag on it based on some vague theory? How can anyone support that approach? This sort of bullying is exactly the culture one wants to work against. To suggest that it is all right to grant a few people the right to limit the choices that other make, it is just disappointing to hear. I can never agree with it.

Steemit allows me to vote on posts until 6 days 11 hours or more. What about self-upvotes on the last day? Of course I can do it too. You can't fight junk appearing on the platform by going about flagging people who choose a business model which you don't agree with. It is just wrong. Let people flag posts as they wish, megalomaniacs included. But people will continue to resist being bullied by hypocrytes who also self-upvote their own spammy comments more often than they curate good content (be that content of their own or by others).

I am very disappointed to see steemmarket supporting such a weak idea as bullying. You guys have a whitelist, you evaluate the quality of content. These are good things to do. I hope to see you standing up against this sort of abuse or working against the problems of trending trash in meaningful, constructive ways; not this kjind of self-agrandizement by a tyrant.