You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: What happened, Steemit? Gone until the necessary reforms.
What do you see as the actual problems in this scenario though? I guess a lot of it comes down to more people = more posts = upvotes being spread around more. You've then got the accounts that are draining the reward pool for themselves on a daily basis.
$5 per post would be a dream for me. It's rare that my posts see anything above $0.50.
It's not just the spreading of votes through bigger crowds, it's internal politics.
But the upvote count dropped, not only the value (286 → 4600; 284 → 383). Wouldn't more users imply more potential readers and hence upvotes? One should analyze the whole series, but anyway, it seems that not only each upvote counted less, but also that there are less users interacting, which is strange.
If she hasn't more than 20 hardcore fans, I start to think there's a more general problem: maybe the platform doesn't promote retention, and on the contrary prefers erratic engagement: a growing user base who hasn't incentives to keep supporting good authors.
I noticed as well that I myself haven't a habit to visit authors who I liked in the past, I just scroll the screen and maybe click on few tags of interest and then few posts that catch my attention. Now and then I go and check for a couple of authors, but most of the time I don't. That is, despite the many I follow, indeed I don't focus on anyone.
But even this behaviour should give more opportunities of engagement when the number of users is growing.