I can remember some early discussions with you and thinking, "Yeah, they can kind of be an asshole sometimes." Since I think you value outside perspectives, I'd argue that you changed over time to fit what is rewarded (both socially and financially). You and I still disagree on things, but (again, from my subjective perspective), the conversations are more enjoyable now. I feel you are contrary in order to find better understanding, not just to be contrary (and possibly rude in the process). To me, this is one of the greatest values of Steemit. It rewards good behavior and good relational connections.
Obvious self shilling posts, are way too obvious and we all know this.
I agree with this statement, but I also want to bring a counter point. Some "Steemit is great, you need to check it out!" posts are really, really important. IMO, every single account should at least have a few of them. Why? Because humans like narratives and narratives from people they know are more effective than narratives from people they don't know. By writing posts about why I value steemit, I've saved myself countless hours. When my friends ask me about it (which happens often since I share Steemit posts on Twitter and Facebook), I just send them a link and move on. As I use the platform (or, more likely, use a different platform like Facebook), I get new revelations of why I think this place is valuable. Sharing those posts is important. Repeatedly sharing that message is also important. It takes, what, 13 impressions for a marketing message to turn into a sale? I have people that have been watching my posting on Steemit for a year now and they are finally creating accounts and/or posting. It requires repetition.
We're so early on, that this repetition hasn't even started yet. Most people don't even know what bitcoins or blockchains are, let alone Steemit.
That said, if they come here and all the posts are just about bitcoins, blockchains, and steemit, they may not care to remain. Their community interests need to be represented well for them to stick around.
Right now there is dangerous draining of the reward pool.
I've seen talk of this and I'm curious where the "dangerous" comes from. It will reach equilibrium and payouts will adjust accordingly, correct? Is there a point where things will just stop function or something? I don't understand the cause for alarm.
Delegating steem power is an interesting solution along with minimum reward caps. That all exists in the blockchain now, it's just not in the Steemit UI. I agree it should be added. It would be nice for community standards to develop over time such as "Yeah, no one should make more than $10 just sharing a link" but even then, as you said, it's all about patterns we see within human society. It's quite possible no matter how we reorganize things, we'll still have the ~1%, ~15%, and ~85%.
I write posts that express my views. I never really got for the reward-driven-posts. aka. i haven't even made a self shilling Steemit post yet even though i am sure i can cash it pretty well.
Also, half the whales still don't touch my profile nor they ever will due to my confrontation. I still tackle them if I have the chance (like the guy you were arguing against). They just don't seem to get in my way any more and I don't get in theirs. Much of the ill behavior has been resolved and there is no need from me to be critical.
Users might enjoy "that many narratives". After that it becomes rather obvious and rather frustrating for many new Steemians. It might have worked early on but is an old game now. You forget that in social media anything can be rendered old news quite fast.
that might be a wrong correlation. The 100+ billion market cap is more likely to be the reason. (that also helped save Steem price btw).
Self upvoting creates a shit-tier perception that will not incentivize people to join the platform for the content. It will become a gambling scheme.
I think we have the power to at least try and change this. There is a way because the wealth can be transferable but also retained from the whales. No other economic systems provides such a unique and flexible delegation.
But hasn't this has been the same story for 12 months? It was hard for me to get started also. Is it harder now? Maybe. But when I started, I had a couple friends who invested real money in the platform so my stuff got some rewards. If people don't have that, it's hard to get noticed. Can that really change?
The rise in crypto market cap was certainly the final triggering reason, but they only hear about that rise through my posts talking about Steemit and cryptocurrency. Again, most people don't even know what bitcoins and blockchains are.
It may, but there are multiple perspectives on this. Some feel justified based on their real investment (similar to investing in a mining rig). I think the conversation around that and some community projects are showing them that may not be an acceptable approach according to community values. It's a dynamic thing which is figuring itself out.
Agreed and it'll be quite interesting to see where it goes. The option to just buy steem and power up is always on the table. Some are willing to do that, and some aren't. I run a weekly exchange report on this, so I see how big the numbers are each week.
I believe distributing pools on tags can make people get noticed. I am not even a dolphin and I helped a few friends get some exposure with my meager up-voting. I believe it can happen.
True. I noticed in my facebook page though that people are also getting bored of facebook. Eventually they will seek a way out.
It is a dynamic equation but the numbers simply show that most people are not interested about crypto but rather just earning money for posting. Investors really have to understand this.