Sort:  

@steevc everything you wrote is fundamentally correct. And @enforcer48 gave an accurate and comprehensive answer on how to get away from this.

It seems to me that this is a historical heritage from the time of Steemit. During the formation of the platform, every user from every corner only heard "create unique content and you will be rewarded". Truly unique content often implies deep and specific topics. Which are not interesting to the mass user.

As a result, we got a fairly authentic social platform, with a certain type of content, for a limited number of users. Although, oddly enough, posts about food and cooking feel very good here. Obviously any social groups love food :)

It is possible to avoid a content conflict only by dividing the reward pool- through communities.

I don't think unique content has to be long, but some types do need longer posts, e.g. food, travel and in-depth articles. Hive could span everything from Twitter to Medium in my opinion.

Loading...

Exactly. I say ditch the reward pool and place the onus for reward on the individual community who can also define what is acceptable within that community and allow them to define their own system of governance.

People can create their own tokens that are less easily DV'd away and some already have. The freedom of Hive allows all sorts of things and smart people will find a way.

!BEER

Given the small sizes of most communities people are loath to lose anyone. We still need to see how Hive can scale.

I dont think the community, or the whales are yet capable of understanding that with a global reward pool that covers absolutely all types of content, 1 type of content will always be perceived as superior and the other wont be able to compete.


Hey @enforcer48, here is a little bit of BEER from @steevc for you. Enjoy it!

Did you know that you can use BEER at dCity game to **buy dCity NFT cards** to rule the world.