I respectfully disagree, especially once the follow feature is fully implemented. A curated feed of carefully selected high quality links can be extremely valuable even without the need to add some sort of comment to each and every one. If I find a poster who consistently identifies and and collects sources from the Internet of interest to me that is worth a lot and it is something I'm willing to pay for, even without added writing. That is especially the case in this format where the added discussion can take place interactively via comments. It doesn't have to be in the original post or from the person making the post.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
A site with just links to other places is pretty commodity. It may have a place as part of Steem but if it becomes the core of Steem or highly remunerative, Steem won't be differentiated from reddit etc. It is also hard to curate such posts well. It seems to be worth discouraging now. But your respectful disagreement has made me want to noodle the issue more.
I view it as more a matter of having a place, as you put it, than a core. But I also don't think it (or anything else outside of clear abuse) should be strongly discouraged. Everything is an experiment now and crushing something at an early stage could potentially kill what evolves into something valuable and a big draw. If no one likes these posts and they don't get upvotes, then so be it. I could say likewise about differentiation. There are plenty of blogging sites already too. Steemit has to find its own unique positioning.
@smooth
>pay for
>
What? Man no one pays for anything here, nor does anyone somehow lose money here...Also regarding creation of posts, read This It will provide correct answers....
It was more of a hypothetical. If I'm willing to pay for something it is a strong indication that it has real value.