I upvoted the OP, not because I agree with the assertions, but because I would like to have a wider discussion. Specifically, the question in the title and the assertion:
Without wide asset distribution steemit will fail!
This seems to imply that the so-called path from "minnow" to "whale" is a requirement for success of the platform.
First of all, I think those fishy names are dumb. Second, I don't see the logic. It seems like a non-essential.
To me, having a certain stake is like having a certain sized house. You know it'll pretty much always be that size unless you decide to make it bigger. The certainty of the size of your stake is more important than having a bigger stake compared to your neighbor.
You know what you can do with your stake, and you have certainty that it will have the same impact now as it will in 5 years. This is something you can use to plan your next move.
This is the main power of stake-based ownership on these kinds of platforms.
https://sites.google.com/site/classismswp15/classism-capitalism-the-cause-and-effect
https://steemit.com/steem/@stellabelle/steem-whitepaper-for-dummies-reward-distribution
I.E. Yes, Steemit is classicist to the core. It needs a Marxist hard fork.
Um, you can take your marxist hardfork and shove it. That's not what I'm saying. If it's not a voluntary shift, it will lead to further abuse, just in a different vein.
Wow. the marxist reference was more satirical than anything. I believed I was agreeing with your post by pointing out what is wrong with Steemit and agreeing that it needs to change. You make a complaint about capitalism without realizing it:
In my quotes above (did you read them?) I'm pointing out to you that the complaint you have, that there is no "path for a minnow to become a whale", is a "classic" complaint of classism, and that this classism you feel should change is actually inherent in the design of Steemit, as outlined in the Steemit White Paper, which I also just quoted for you. I agree with your post. I agree we need a change. I don't really think Steemit should be communist. How would that even work: a decentralized platform cannot have a central control of economic inputs and outputs. It was just my way of saying that Steemit does indeed need to change, and the thing that needs to change are some of it's capitalistic aspects. However, perhaps you don't realize this, and would like to defend these particular aspects of capitalism despite your complaints?
Yeah, big difference between encouraging voluntary support of others, and trying a top down model that forces some fake version of equality.
And no, that is one version of capitalism. Go back, read history. Look where we started. Capitalism was the means to give each man ownership ability. It freed him from feudalism. He had a stake. But, if the mass of users voluntary surrender their stake to an oligarchy, it looks very much the same as pre-capitalist society, only marginally richer.
yes but at the cost of losing the Commons. I have read history, I think we just have a different interpretation of it. I suppose we could argue the merits of private ownership too, but that's not the part I'm most concerned with. There is a dynamic and much needed balancing between private ownership and the Commons. Without the concept of the Commons, pure ownership is slavery. For instance, do you believe all humans should have equal access to fresh drinking water? Unfortunately fresh drinking water isn't equally distributed on the planet. Should something be done about this, or should "market forces" do their bidding?
If the market were left alone, and not protected by govt/corp partnerships (talking USA here) it remains to be seen what would happen with water. It's obscene that we have a shortage, when unbottling some of it and putting it back into the eco system could go a long way to correcting some of this. Here's my position. Anything that is not voluntary, eventually becomes slavery. Anything. If coercion must be used, it's less than ideal. but, the deck is so rigged right now, it's hard to imagine a world where our reality is different. I just don't believe in using a monopoly on force to make people do "the right thing" because, who gets to decide what that thing is, and how long until that becomes a burden we can't bear?
But, it won't have the same impact in five years. It doesn't even have the same impact it had a year ago. It's virtually impossible for beginners, in the current climate here to get a single post even seen, forget getting a decent payout, because the top of the trending category is owned by about six accounts, and if you go through their wallets, you'll see, they didn't earn the votes, they bought them. Some of these people weren't even anything here five months ago, forget five years. Yes, work is important, I'm not suggesting we reward people who don't work. But, look, everyone wants to point to the top and say its not fair, but the ones at the bottom build that, by investing in the top, instead of investing in themselves. But, it can't be done solo here. It's impossible. It requires support and teamwork. The top post on trending Right this very minute says in the opening line I'VE NEVER CONTRIBUTED TO STEEMIT!
no it's not virtually impossible
and yes it can be done solo.
in fact it's a lot easier now than it ever has before.
It's been done...and it's BEING done as we speak.
just work at it.
So, who do you know, Everit, I respect your knowledge here, that has come from a new account recently, WITHOUT buying votes and gotten past minnow status. Can you give me one example?
depends on what you call 'whale'
I make a fairly decent amount of money off steem (10K SP + 7K delegation rented)
I started with nothing...and it was HARDER a year ago than it is now.
IF I'd re invested everything I'd most likely have 50K or more.
I chose not to do that. I've withdraw a fair amount of steem and bought stuff.
(paid off ALL my bills...I'm debt free...and bought a few toys)
PappaPepper has done WAY better than me...he's bought a farm with his earning.
an actual farm...in the Ozarks. He made over a 100K last year alone..
He started from nothing...and did not invest.
There are others....I mostly don't pay much attention to what others are doing...I look out for myself.
No, it was harder for YOU a year ago, because you had 0 audience. I offer you the same challenge. Start with a new account, without announcing who you are, or upvoting yourself from this one, or adding outside investment dollars and get back to me in a few weeks.
now why would I want to do that?
why would I give up all my hard work ?
$42.775
that's what I've made TODAY...in SBD.
I'm going to buy me some bitcoin with it.
or litecoin..or Ethereum, or Bitcoin cash....
soooo many choices.
then when the current dip is done.
THEIR value will increase.
not a fair comparison. You established your voice in a much less crowded arena, with fewer established alliances, and much more personal voting and curating taking place. I was there, I know what it was like. I'm telling you, watching these newbies, it's not like it was. On any odd day in Aug 16, some weird kid with 2 followers might and DID make 4 grand on a makeup tutorial. There was more money per user. It was much easier. And all I'm really doing here, is encouraging people to do their own damn voting.
I also started at that time. I barely invested until I was past 5000 SP and even now I am close to even on what I've taken out and what I've put in, I am not an excellent writer. I did buy some votes in the past couple months, but not much before that. I just kept posting and I never took any money out.
It was harder as Everite states, as we didn't have bots and we didn't have minnow projects. Also the reward pool was not as linear as it is now, so the top posts took nearly the whole reward pool.
Quit worrying and build the account. SteemIt is a sink or swim platform. Survival of the fittest.
Not worried. Trying to convince more fish to swim their own way instead of leasing their power to big dolphins and whales. Here's how it goes, I get you to rent me your power for a small return. My vote goes in before yours and twenty others, and BAM, I get five times what you get, because of my SP (if I'm a whale) Suckers game. Investing that SP to vote for up and coming accounts and building your own syndicate is where it's at for the long haul. Who knows when the whales may stop selling votes? Or the prices get too high?
I do think minnows delegating their steem power while they are young, is a questionable strategy.
I came here knowing no one and ground my account up, I am now planning on staying here despite not being a great blogger. Why? Because there are other ways to invest and grow my Steem Power.
Why else would I stay if I didn't want to be a blogger when I grow up? (not meant to be said with a "tone"). I didn't picture it this way in the early days, it is what has developed. I agree we have a distribution problem. However, I am fine with the whales earning. The more people who are winning the more attractive this becomes as an investment.
Also, we really don't need to retain people who do not have anything to put in. Either time, outstanding talent or money.
BTW, it was not harder. Not even close. Talk to someone with a new account now, where they can barely make one or two posts a day and a few votes and comments before running out of bandwidth. That was NEVER a problem in the early days. Sorry, but you're both wrong. It's easier for you now, because you're established, know the ropes, have at least some audience and a vote big enough to provide seed money for a decent payout.
Antonopoulos is the second biggest name in crypto, behind Nakamoto.
If he talks about steem, billionaires start paying attention.
Well, there's the issue. Stop looking at trending. I never even think about it until someone complains about it.
But, the vast majority of pieces never get seen, especially if you're new, with not much audience, unless they reach that category.
I interpret what you're saying, "You'll never be seen unless you reach trending."
If that's what you're saying, you're dead wrong. Trending is never a requirement to be seen. It's just a distraction. Ignore it.
Pardon me for saying so, but I dare you to start a brand new account, with the SP being allotted, without upvoting yourself from this one, or announcing who you are, and get a $100 payout in less than three months. We are getting 250k posts per day. Getting seen is a problem, and IMO vote selling is part of it. You've been here since I got here, do you really think it's the same? And, without adding outside investment,or buying votes.
Way to move the goal post.
Um, everything he just mentioned here, he wrote in the OP, no moved goal posts, this is the reality, you're the one claiming its easier now. It is for you, because you have an established audience. but, trust me, as having done really well, here, then needing to take some time away and power down to not quite starting from scratch, but close, it's nowhere near as simple as it was a year ago. Your making unsupportable blanket statements. The SP they start with is barely enough to do two or three small posts, or do ten votes, but not both, and then they have zero left to engage an audience with. It's much harder, plus, the SP they start with is a loan, not a grant like we had. Sorry inertia, you're wrong. Not saying it can't be done, but the path is not as clear as it was.
Restarting your account now , Has no merit on what a noob can do, You already know the places to go to get decent votes on your blogs, you know the whales to follow to get a higher return for votes,, so an experienced user re starting from scratch bears no value to the efforts a noob may have to put in
Well, they would still find out it's a lot harder and might be more apt to help out. No, it's not a direct comparison, but trust me, a year ago, this was a different game entirely.
You have some good observations and points of view to consider.
Complain or try.