maybe we could tone down the "We're number 1!" language a bit?
I absolutely agree, already too many hallelujah posts here on Steemit, and it'll not help when also Steemit INC start doing that. Fact is that we have a basic service that runs quite ok. Other facts are that we miss many basic things like integrated HELP pages, HELP channel, Service Knowledge Base, Notice Board, Discussion Boards (like the developers blog you mentioned), Community Services, Tools for Users to help on making their post visible and so on. To my this are basic necessities to keep many of the (new) Steemians active.
Maybe also the value of Steem had to do something with the number of new signups, as well as the number of returning users. But we need to be careful, Cryptospace looks to be in a bubble on the exchanges IMHO. And what will happen when this bursts? We absolutely need a solid service with the right set of features as well as good support channels.
As one of the new users who have joined in the last month, I strongly support your position. Each of the basics you mention would be found helpful by me.
I have made several posts and devoted considerable time to learning how to post here, as well as researching the topics, and received relatively little financial reward, particularly in view of the fact that one author on Steemit has an average reward per post in excess of 170,000.
Another fact this particular datum suggests is that there may be systemic inequities in Steemit. I don't wish to appear to be bad-mouthing those that are achieving great results from their posts, but do want to point out that this amazing dichotomy in results does suggest that there are means of profiting from Steemit that do not derive from the actual value of posts.
I, as a new user, may simply not understand how certain posts deliver value, and it certainly is true that I lack such a nuanced understanding (also, I am not primarily motivated by remuneration, so do not post so as to maximize financial reward), but I don't feel it is unreasonable to find such a gigantic divergence in post rewards evidentiary of potential abuse of the reward system of Steemit.
Please understand I am not making an accusation, rather I am pointing to evidence that personally I do not have to requisite knowledge to dismiss, or otherwise explain, so am openly bringing up the topic so that I might attain that understanding, as well as giving those with that understanding an opportunity to fix any problem that might actually exist.
Thanks!
The extreme short tail of authors and articles that get a lot of the rewards has in my view to do with level follow the level above them and maybe their own, but not the levels below them. In the pyramid of SP holders, there are a few in the top of the pyramid with lot of value to their votes; The lower you get in the pyramid the lower the SP levels of the users. After being on Steemit for more than 5 months and more than 250 posts and 3.000 comments, I have some higher SP holders following me, but although I interact with a lot of different users, including the higher SP holders, I rarely get the higher SP holder to start following me. Sometimes I'm helped by one or more of my higher SP holders when they vote early what result in a higher ranking in the HOT channel which generally gives me a bit more votes. I also think that a lot of users vote for the posts with a high rewards on it, thinking it will bring them more rewards. The opposite is true though. Better not to vote for the high rewarded posts, since most of the curation rewards goes to the first couple of voters, not to the last, they get (almost) nothing. The voting curve is by far from linear.
It seems that this system may be easy to decry by less financially able, and far more numerous, users.
I personally recommend that Steemit admins and policy influencers closely and carefully examine the potential to disrupt the community that perceived unfairness and appearance of corruption, particularly from the point of view of users, desirous of remuneration, and discovering, as i have, the wide divergence between posts so advantaged and their own.
There is an obvious potential for unrest and dissatisfaction, and it may be that action now to avoid such unrest could benefit Steemit in the long run.
I am trying very hard to ensure it is clear I am not making such complaints, and do actually mean the words I am using, such as 'appearance'. This may be an issue that provokes defensive responses, and I am not attacking any person. I intend to elicit consideration and thought about potential problems for Steemit, I hope that is clear.
Thanks for you informative response!
I wrote many times similar things you mention. Things like "appearance of corruption" cannot be true since everyone is allowed to do whatever the users likes to do. However, when regarding fairness that is required to grow Steemit whilst keeping the small SP holders onboard, that is a different topic. I do worry about that as well. Now the Steem price is up (in a bubble I think, but still) more users are getting some 10s cents to some dollars on a post, but compared to that there are some posts around now getting 5k-10k$. It seems to be the imbalance we have in the real world, only a few getting the most of the available rewards. But who's "fault" it is, that is the question. Only thorough analyses of the data can reveal maybe a little bit, but again, everyone is allowed to do whatever they want and when high SP holders do not like to follow users lower in the pyramid, and when low SP holders are all over the high SP holders to try to get there votes, and high SP holders getting quite a bit of votes from high SP holders, that is all very legit. But this all maybe unfair indeed. We have to see over time what will happen. In the next software upgrade the distribution of some of the rewards will be less focussed to the high SP holders benefiting the lower SP holders
I believe such imbalance as is presently observed on Steemit will either be fixed, or drive people to another platform. That this will soon be addressed is a very good thing for Steemit.
Thanks for your substantive reply!
Some of it will be addressed, but that does not change the fact that high SP holders are in the follow list of high SP holders and they vote for each other, like being on the same level in the pyramid. I never analysed things, but most of the high SP holders are day one users, so logically they form their community and the larger the community gets the more difficult will it get to become part of their community. It is like with you and your friends, the more you have to less change for someone else to become part of your friends group. The new high SP holders I think also get direct attention by the existing large SP holders, they have something in common, namely high SP. Somehow I think like in real life kind stick to kind in terms of value and money. That can never be solved by Steemit Inc or the community, that will be like it is, like in real life, when we do not want government to control eg size of company, income of C-level or something, than they go out of hand like in the USA, 1 person earning 2 Billion a year, and millions who cannot buy their groceries.
What this imbalance will do for Steemit, that is the question. I have my doom scenarios as well, but it may also be little less doom. I think being on Steemit should not be about money to start with, since when that is the only reason to be here, then you will quickly leave the platform. Look at my posts and rewards, some are ok for the time spend, but most of them gives me rewards I could not even pay a quarter cup of coffee from. And then I'm not talking about the time I spend on Steemit.
Time will tell what will happen with Steemit. Recently a lot of new users came to the platform, also some old users started becoming active again. I think that is because of the potential rewards due to Steem price being far up by now. How ling this will take, and how many will drop the ball, only time will tell.
I suspect that a system in which the speech of some is always, regardless of the content of that speech, going to receive higher monetary rewards is conceptually flawed at best, and reminiscent of the theory of the divine right of kings.
I am not saying that they can't have the wealth they possess. I am saying that the wealth of a speaker does not inherently impart value to the content of their speech, and that insofar as Steemit does value speech in this way, it is inherently unjust, and will drive the creation of a competitor that is inherently just.
If Steemit fails due to being outcompeted by another platform, whales will kill the golden goose to retain their wealth, and Steemit will fail. Even if no whale removes their wealth from Steemit in that case, Steemit will fail, and the whale will lose their wealth.
This latter scenario is unlikely. The former is highly likely, even certain, unless Steemit is so configured to allow users to value speech according to the inherent value they find in it, regardless of the wealth of the speaker.
Thanks for your substantive and considered response!