We've been at this state now for a year or two, that's enough of time to see that this isn't working and we need changes. You want to stay in this state and keep the few thousands we have, while we're not really gaining, but others are aware that we don't have unlimited time for a window, where Steem can actually become a success.
Also, what we have is few thousand content creators, but how many real readers for that content do we have? Don't include commenters that are there just for upvotes or trying to build their own profile.
Maybe it is time to think on how we start attracting people to this place, who actually don't want to earn but find and read content just for their own enjoyment.
You see, this is the problem. We've moved on, buddy. Remember that popular saying "Steem isn't Steemit"? Well, that applies now more than ever. We got Steem Monsters, Next Colony and Steem Engine, to name a few. So my point being that this blockchain is flourishing at the moment. People been saying Steem is dead for years now. It's just FUD, nothing more. I mean, why not simply trial some of these proposed changes on a "Steemit" SMT token, right? Hell, this could even be done on Steem Engine now!
You just have to read the comments on the latest HF21 announcement to see people are pissed at selected changes and rightfully so. Taking away from authors so that "good and valuable content" gets trending again? Lol, I'll give you $5 right now if you can define what exactly entails "good content". That statement is as subjective as it gets. I know bid-bots are a nuisance but as I said before, cutting off your nose to spite your face, just ain't the solution.
I know many content creators who've worked tirelessly in building their account to empower themselves. Not powering down and selling off their stakes to invest in other projects. And now what? They get shafted again because of the latest HF? Seems unfair to me, especially with the middle class actually creating some "proper" decentralization up in here. Bottom line is it'll be hard to find a good balance to please everyone, no doubt. But doing so at the cost of the authors themselves? What's the point of incentivizing curation when the content ain't there anymore?
Right now, I don't buy it. But hey, let's see how this all pans out.
Yes, that's what everyone here is trying to do, it seems, but system where people want to empower others is what I guess these changes are trying to achieve. That system will be inherently more valuable as it will attract way more people.
And to decide if the blockchain is flourishing, you should really be counting the number of people joining, using and leaving the platform.
But yes, there's always complaints as people come from different angles. What's good for someone will affect someone else negatively, and someone might think short term and the other long term. And not everyone wants the same and even if they did, they probably won't have the same info available and their thought processes will also differ greatly. Such is life.
But I agree, let's see how it pans out. Reverting back can be always done.
We've been at this state now for a year or two, that's enough of time to see that this isn't working and we need changes. You want to stay in this state and keep the few thousands we have, while we're not really gaining, but others are aware that we don't have unlimited time for a window, where Steem can actually become a success.
Also, what we have is few thousand content creators, but how many real readers for that content do we have? Don't include commenters that are there just for upvotes or trying to build their own profile.
Maybe it is time to think on how we start attracting people to this place, who actually don't want to earn but find and read content just for their own enjoyment.
You see, this is the problem. We've moved on, buddy. Remember that popular saying "Steem isn't Steemit"? Well, that applies now more than ever. We got Steem Monsters, Next Colony and Steem Engine, to name a few. So my point being that this blockchain is flourishing at the moment. People been saying Steem is dead for years now. It's just FUD, nothing more. I mean, why not simply trial some of these proposed changes on a "Steemit" SMT token, right? Hell, this could even be done on Steem Engine now!
You just have to read the comments on the latest HF21 announcement to see people are pissed at selected changes and rightfully so. Taking away from authors so that "good and valuable content" gets trending again? Lol, I'll give you $5 right now if you can define what exactly entails "good content". That statement is as subjective as it gets. I know bid-bots are a nuisance but as I said before, cutting off your nose to spite your face, just ain't the solution.
I know many content creators who've worked tirelessly in building their account to empower themselves. Not powering down and selling off their stakes to invest in other projects. And now what? They get shafted again because of the latest HF? Seems unfair to me, especially with the middle class actually creating some "proper" decentralization up in here. Bottom line is it'll be hard to find a good balance to please everyone, no doubt. But doing so at the cost of the authors themselves? What's the point of incentivizing curation when the content ain't there anymore?
Right now, I don't buy it. But hey, let's see how this all pans out.
Yes, that's what everyone here is trying to do, it seems, but system where people want to empower others is what I guess these changes are trying to achieve. That system will be inherently more valuable as it will attract way more people.
And to decide if the blockchain is flourishing, you should really be counting the number of people joining, using and leaving the platform.
But yes, there's always complaints as people come from different angles. What's good for someone will affect someone else negatively, and someone might think short term and the other long term. And not everyone wants the same and even if they did, they probably won't have the same info available and their thought processes will also differ greatly. Such is life.
But I agree, let's see how it pans out. Reverting back can be always done.