the thing with the block is that everyone has and is entitled to their own opinion on how it should work, what they would like to see happen and even have ideas on how it should happen. So the way I 'get it' could be the complete opposite to what you get.
There is only a small portion of the global population that produces awesome blogging content. we you want restrictions on the quality then you gotta take a hit with the qty, thats the message I took from the post.
My person feelings are that steem is only a baby, its needs time to grow, and it can not grow if there is no one to engage with content. Right now there is feck all inventive to engage. So its one thing supporting the authors, but if the full circle is not supported then the circle will break and well that does not hold up well for the long term future of steem.
we all bring different qualities and talents to the platform, why restrict benefits to just awesome content creators and developers?
Right now, steem is in a rather good place. Prices and activity is low, its easier to find those that are committed to the long term success of steem and find those committed to ensuring authors have an engaged audience. Now is the time to be building a core of dolphins so when the next wave comes, via apps or even just a rise in crypto, we as a collective steem community will be better able to manage the influx.
I think I got the same message but it's just that it appears to me to be complaining. I'm not sure what is being called for to happen. This is a bit of a subtle perspective so it's best summed up by asking, what action do you feel inspired (or even instructed) to take having read this post?
Maybe I'm being too much of an engineer, but I keep seeing these dangling phrases everywhere and no one is seeming to take notice. For instance you say
why restrict benefits to just awesome content creators and developers?
Can I ask, who is restricting benefits? Are you talking about the free choice that stakeholders make when they decide who to reward by voting on posts? If so are you saying to those stakeholders that they should reconsider their voting habits?
Do you see what I'm getting at here? Each of these kinds of statements implies at the very least an encouragement to do something, or more likely a wish or even order to do something. I'm trying to make that clear as no one else seems to be.
You're right, there is a huge diversity of opinion, far more than any other platform I've been involved with and it's something I love. I respect your work and I say all this (as always - really always) in the spirit of free thought and debate.
I guess I am talking about the free choice that stakeholders make when they decide who to reward by voting on posts and yes I do think stakeholders should reconsider their voting habbits.
I also think steemit inc has a part to play by delegating to apps and not 'enabling' others that are focused on keeping the block active with the same power.
The thing is, as your rightly put it, its all free choice. However decisions can be influenced by offering alternatives, of which there we none really put in this post.
the thing with the block is that everyone has and is entitled to their own opinion on how it should work, what they would like to see happen and even have ideas on how it should happen. So the way I 'get it' could be the complete opposite to what you get.
There is only a small portion of the global population that produces awesome blogging content. we you want restrictions on the quality then you gotta take a hit with the qty, thats the message I took from the post.
My person feelings are that steem is only a baby, its needs time to grow, and it can not grow if there is no one to engage with content. Right now there is feck all inventive to engage. So its one thing supporting the authors, but if the full circle is not supported then the circle will break and well that does not hold up well for the long term future of steem.
we all bring different qualities and talents to the platform, why restrict benefits to just awesome content creators and developers?
Right now, steem is in a rather good place. Prices and activity is low, its easier to find those that are committed to the long term success of steem and find those committed to ensuring authors have an engaged audience. Now is the time to be building a core of dolphins so when the next wave comes, via apps or even just a rise in crypto, we as a collective steem community will be better able to manage the influx.
Thanks kinda how I see it. how do you see it?
I think I got the same message but it's just that it appears to me to be complaining. I'm not sure what is being called for to happen. This is a bit of a subtle perspective so it's best summed up by asking, what action do you feel inspired (or even instructed) to take having read this post?
Maybe I'm being too much of an engineer, but I keep seeing these dangling phrases everywhere and no one is seeming to take notice. For instance you say
Can I ask, who is restricting benefits? Are you talking about the free choice that stakeholders make when they decide who to reward by voting on posts? If so are you saying to those stakeholders that they should reconsider their voting habits?
Do you see what I'm getting at here? Each of these kinds of statements implies at the very least an encouragement to do something, or more likely a wish or even order to do something. I'm trying to make that clear as no one else seems to be.
You're right, there is a huge diversity of opinion, far more than any other platform I've been involved with and it's something I love. I respect your work and I say all this (as always - really always) in the spirit of free thought and debate.
I guess I am talking about the free choice that stakeholders make when they decide who to reward by voting on posts and yes I do think stakeholders should reconsider their voting habbits.
I also think steemit inc has a part to play by delegating to apps and not 'enabling' others that are focused on keeping the block active with the same power.
The thing is, as your rightly put it, its all free choice. However decisions can be influenced by offering alternatives, of which there we none really put in this post.