The fundamental problem with steem is that the rules are set up to encourage and then maintain an oligarchy. As long as that continues, Steem, as a content platform or social network, is doomed. An oligarchy is not decentralized. The hierarchy formed by proof of stake is not decentralized. As a content platform the rules need to be set up to reward quality content not who has the most stake. Of course with an oligarchy it is hard to change the rules to benefit the majority over the minority. We see that in government today and it is causing all kinds of problems. Yes, people can buy into Steem, but money is not a substitute for proof of brain in either the extra-steem world or steem.

I have introduced many people to Steem, but I'm the only one regularly using it. Once they learn about all the limits and that those highly paid posts are really purchased, they lose interest. Now with RC so limited for new users, things will be even worse. I see Steem as an interesting experiment, which is why I am here. My hope is that it will dramatically improve, or else a competitor will come along that bests it. The basic idea is really good, its current and continued implementation is just flawed. I could say that that is to be expected given the uncharted territory Steem is in, but many many posts have pointed out problems, some have suggested solutions, and as far as I can tell the oligarchy has rejected all of them.

Proud member of #steemitbloggers @steemitbloggers