I think a big issue here is that there’s a great lack of ”skin in the game”.
When I joined, my theory was that the whales would be incentivized by the system to moderate the trending page, for instance, in order to protect the value of their stake.
But it turns out, the whales have the least incentive to give a single fuck about anything.
It’s a really upside-down situation, honestly.
I agree with you there, but don't think free trade/free markets are to blame. I think, if anything, it's a bad business model/structure. It reminds me a lot of Multi-Line Marketing quasi-scams (the trending page stuff). If this low quality rubbish is truly what gets rewarded most here, I'd say that is a result of not reading market signals accurately, and just milking a dying cow.
The actual market is pretty good, when one looks where the real engagment is (quality posts, comment threads, etc). It seems to me that it is precisely where this platform does not recognize and honor organic market signals (overpaid infomercial posts vs. posts with actual quality engagement) that the platform fails.
Anyway. I will be thinking about what you said. One thing I know is that this platform, for all its shitty spots, is miles beyond data-collection sites like Facebook.
A better model, more accurate to reading market signals for organic attention and quality, could take over at any time.
I already went to bed and I’m on my phone, but I do wish to continue this discussion. It’s interesting.
Basically what I am saying is you can't blame freedom itself for people's individual retardation. ;)
But on one point, we can't assume freedom is perfect as people as individuals can be terrible.
How can freedom be anything other than freedom? I guess I would ask you to define “perfect” here.
Freedom can be many things, especially in terms describing things. Like cheese can be also something else than only cheese, as it can be tasty.
Would you ask?
No perfect freedom can be achieved as people tend to actively reduce freedom with theie freedom.
This is also a reason why people claim Steem is not actually free and thus ignoring the critique at flaws of humans acting within their freedom.
I think this is my point. Freedom is not “produced.” It just is. What individual actors do with it is up to them, and on them. To attempt to qualitatively evaluate freedom itself seems strange to me.
That's a good point.
However, what is the reason you say "I'd argue that Steemit is a pretty far cry from an actual free market setting."?
As it's strange to qualitatively evaluate freedom.
A free market is individual market actors trading with no regulation, no? In that sense, Steemit is a synthetic, mini-“free market,” which is actually confined by many different rules and realities that make it more of a product on the market, than a real reflection of a free market itself.
There are early adopters and investors who own large shares and vast influence, a rigid template for how things work (the code) and parameters/guidelines for how steemit.com can be used.
This is very different from the open concept of “free trade” itself. Indeed, if the platform doesn’t meet market demand, it will fail. The free market itself, can never “fail” or “succeed” as the freedom to trade is simply a reality that can be suppressed or encouraged, but never erased.
Y no sólo no se puede culpar al mercado de la imperfección humana, sino que tampoco puedes culpar al mercado de la imperfección de un sistema (en este caso, Steemit).