If the only metric considered is economic, then only economic undertakings are considerable in analyzing success. I have attained much success at engagement and gaining insight through the criticisms of better minds of my thoughts, and this is far more valuable to me than some dollars, or Steem.

Money is the language of markets. This is not going to change. The only way we have which is universal to quantify demand is how much people are willing to pay for something. We need this feedback loop.

The fact is, in the regular world rent and tax are priced in money. So you will not be able to pay your electric bill to blog or mine crypto if it didn't generate enough money for your business operation to be sustainable (not even profitable).

For social media and UX like Steemit to actually succeed at changing the world, other metrics that are more important than mere money must be considered. It is the focus on stake and stake-weighting, a legacy of indoctrination imposed by banksters whose hoarding of wealth produces much of the misery of the real world, that has engendered many of the extant problems regarding Steemit rewards.

Outdated ideology is in your post. There is no such thing as "hoarding wealth". To read that would imply wealth is zero sum and the pie is fixed. I do not see this in the latest economic text books or anywhere so where do you get the idea that wealth isn't being created? Here is how it's created...

The people who have, who were here before you, who are your elders or seniors, or mentors, are the people who you must provide services to. People have wants and needs and by supplying these they will reward you. This is the most basic element of how a service economy works. No one has everything and most people have something to offer.

What this means is that each new person who joins the network brings more wealth to the network based on what they have to offer to the network. The whales cannot hoard wealth unless they don't want anything from anyone else on the network in which case the network has a low utility to the whales. Provide higher utility and the wealth will grow regardless of whales.

The fact is there will never be perfect equality. It's not natural. Some by way of luck are born with more than others. Some work their way up from almost nothing. The people who work their way up in Steem for the most part had to create wealth in the process of doing it. They had to provide some value to some of the people to get upvoted. If you're talking about whales who were grandfathered in from pre-Steem launch then you would have a point there.

The founders do have quite a bit more Steem than everyone else and things could be better but the point is wealth should grow not simply be redistributed. Growing the pie is better than re-arranging deck chairs on the titanic.

Other metrics than money which matter:

• Followers
• Total upvotes received
• Ratios (posts to followers or posts to upvote)

It's not just the money which determines for the blogger the growth of their content producing. It's other metrics too but the point is money is what allows for sustainable content production. It's what makes everything else possible.