RE: We are investors, not customers, act like you own it because you do.
@whatsup very valid points, but I think the issues plaguing Steem cannot be fixed with pull requests. It's all fine and well to say submit a pull request, but the issues with Steemit are Steem issues themselves, fundamental design flaws in the blockchain and approach that place too much trust in people to do the right thing.
It's clear SMT's are the focus for STINC right now. I am still sceptical of the value they'll bring, the ability to run ICO's and build entire applications on Steem sounds great to me as a developer. But I think in the case of Steemit, people need to understand that its purpose for existence is to showcase what SMT's can do.
It became apparent to me a while ago that Steemit is nothing more than a portfolio piece, a shiny example they can throw into the brochure when advertising the benefits of SMT's. They can point to this site and say, "You too can build sites like this" - which means that while Steemit will most likely not really change, SMT's open up new possibilities.
If/when SMT's finally launch, provided they're released as promised by STINC, it'll give the community an option to build their own new Steemit free of STINC, a true reset from zero. While it means that the Steem currencies might not be used, it gives the users of this site a real opportunity to create something better.
Time will tell.
Also a valid position. I respect it. I also hope for SMTs to bring value and I also agree we do not have a track record to point at regarding new development, but surely we can give some credit to the lack of trouble we've had with the blockchain it's self. I'm not convinced, but I am hopeful.
I disagree strongly on fundamental flaws, I think we have culture flaws. If people would curate with up and down votes and eyes on the site, the problems with good vs. bad actors would be minimized. (depending on what flaws you are referring to)
Another thing I agree with is SteemIt is just the flag ship or the firehose. So, why don't we stop fighting about it? If the Steem coin ends up not being a good token money will go to an SMT.
I swear people are so used to wanting to be in charge of a problem they are conflating issues into "fatal flaws". It is a young product in a young industry and many many businesses have failed trying to pay for content.
I appreciate your view very much. Thank you for taking the time to express it.
Elaborating on what I see as flaws in Steem, the way I see it is:
The way I see it, there are cultural issues with Steem as well, but there are flaws in the methodology. The concept of Steem places way too much trust in people doing the right thing, as a developer I find people are the flaw in almost everything.
If these issues were cultural, we could fix them. But the problem is, the very users of this site who can make a change aka the whales are contributing to the problem, quite content to sit there and live of self-upvoting. I strongly believe self-upvoting should be deincentivise by as much as 50%. Make it profitable for whales to profit off of upvoting other people: spread the wealth.
I don't think I would say I've seen people fighting about the issues, more-so passionately putting their emotions into words in the form of Steemit posts. Admittedly, I do get tired of seeing the same issues being regurgitated over and over again, especially when I see some Steemit users writing a post like, "How to fix Steemit", "Issues with Steemit, let's work together" and in the same breath go and spend a few hundred dollars in bid bots to get to the trending page, completely nullfiying their own argument (because you don't see these users declining payments either).
Good chatting with you @whatsup - I love it when someone posts something that really allows me to engage in like this. I am pretty passionate about Steem/Steemit and the way things are here, except most people never really get to hear what I have to say because I am a small-fry around here.
I disagree that all three things are issues. We are achieving more distribution. If you are interested read my post from about a week ago, "Why Steem is Perfectly Fair". I will summarize it here.
Each user has exactly the influence on the site as the stake that they hold. That is true with witness votes and the reward pool.
If someone wants to buy in and self-upvote, in a Haejin type manner, it is just a wash. It hurts no one else's stake. Some like to call it the community reward pool, but an Investor's Funded Reward Pool would be just as accurate. Self-voting is fine. While I agree it is undesirable from a growth perspective, (probably) It helps the market cap and they are only allocating their own rewards. If it is enough to matter, then they have enough stake to ruin their own investment if they want to.
Everyone else can flag bad behavior as they see fit. All culture issues.
I can only assume that all the different users view the stake differently here. But the ACTUAL reality, beyond all the "shoulds" and "supposed to's" is your stake is just that, yours. You have either bought or earned a portion of the reward pool to do with, whatever you like. Including flagging, so if someone is doing something you don't like, you can flag them. If someone is too big for your flag to matter, then how is this any different from the rest of reality.
The government does stuff I don't like all the time, they're too big for me to flag.
Corporations do things I don't like all the time, they're too big for me to flag.
All the billionaires(whales) in the world could all pool their money together, and probably solve every global problem ever, but I wouldn't hold my breath, more than likely they're going to use their money to make more money, which at our own level is what each of us is trying to do.
Everyone's stake is there own and the rest is lip service.
There is no "Reward Pool Rape" It is simply people using their stake.
Any user can flag or upvote at will. (There might be consequences)
The code is law. The rest is human reaction.
If you're invested in steem and many other avenues, why would preclude you to put more time into the platform to grow your investment?
The idea of an investor is someone who puts money into an idea and then let's the creator increase the value.
In the sake of steem, despite the fact that I've "invested" quite a bit of money into this, I am very busy with all of my other day to day activities such as my career as an engineer.
I really find it hard to believe that the majority of whales have nothing better to do than to sit around and look for posts to upvote so I think the real solution is for hungry minnows to continue to come up with ideas and find ways to target steem investors.
we are now debating "Passive Investment" with stakeholder. Whales rarely do vote and thus have leased their SP out via Delegation. That is a passive investment. It does not take time.
My point is that minnows who do not wish to invest money will have to invest time. It's a long slow climb, I know because I've done it.
If someone at either level. Minnow or Investor has a better deal elsewhere and doesn't wish to speculate on increasing value, they should take it. That is the advice I would give my own adult children.
On the Haejin matter I noticed Thejohalfiles is piling in with a few downvotes, just a heads up in case you hadn't noticed!
That is a good thing, I am for flagging. I am just saying it isn't rape or any of the drama that people talk about. It is using stake, and others can also use their stake. :) It is all a wash!
Thanks for letting me know, I actually hadn't noticed.
I completely agree with you @whatsup! 👍
Should been a post in itself.