Thank you for posting @trafalgar.
To answer your title's query......I hope so. As long as there is freedom at Steemit...there will be inequality and diversity.
There is enough room for everyone under the umbrella of Steemit and those who do not think so are missing the point.....cream always rises to the top....and free market principles applied will naturally eliminate the dross.
With regard to voting one's own content; below is a quote attributed to smooth...apologies for not having also copied the date and time as well.....
To quote @smooth:
"Someone who buys SP and then selfvotes is not 'draining' anything and at best can get back a portion of what was put in. It causes no harm at all."
Investors are the ones who underwrite all of the rewards on this platform. If you are not an investor, or are only a smaller investor, you need to focus your efforts on creating inspiring content that makes investors want to give their money to you. Whatever else they do or don't do with their money (including self-voting) is not your concern and does not harm you in any way. Nevertheless, you do have a downvote that you can use to disagree with what you think are underserved rewards. I suggest using it."
"The idea of creating 'lists of shame' and demonizing people is divisive, creates a hostile and toxic environment attractive to no one, and serves no useful purpose. There is no way to tell from these lists whether the content is deserving of the rewards or not. The only way to tell is by actually looking at the content, and if you think it is undeserving, downvote it."
"Your own statistics show that self-voting is awarding about 8.5% of the reward pool. I don't find that suggestive of any problem whatsoever. It is probably a very reasonable number given that the current parameters give people 10 full power votes to make per day. Thus one is being applied to the voters' own content and nine to others' (on average, of course). Seems fine."
Wishing you all the best. Cheers.
thank you, I'm also interested in what you think about the quality of my short content. can be as candid as you wish
I also added this to the origianl text which i think clears up a lot of the economics of it:
Essentially I'm now competing vs how much I would make if I completely lent out my voting power to a bot, which pays maybe 70-80c to the dollar. So while the self voting may look ugly, it's actually barely breaking even against potential passive income. If I lent it out full time, everyone still loses the same amount in terms of the hit to the rewards pool, just means the average vote buyer will get the money.
So basically it's a choice between traf's content or the average vote buyer's. Recent personal circumstances took a turn for the worse (which is why I was away for so long) and I don't have the luxury to be too altruistic for now. =(
Thank you for your reply @trafalgar.
Regarding the quality of your posts.....there is no doubt of your technical ability to communicate a thought.....there is also completed thought....with an introduction, body and ending on a said topic. Your style is reflected in both the long and short posts. With regard to the shorter posts, as you stated above; to refine and condense thoughts to a joke is a process that requires ability and time. Last but not least, the fact that your work is original has merit as well. bleujay's personal taste may not agree with the baseness of the language at times, however in the interest of freedom, I would wish everyone the opportunity to succeed on Steemit.
I do understand the business aspect of your conundrum on a much smaller scale...yet the same query regarding one's investment in Steem exist. After the last HF.... it was difficult for bleujay to see the benefit of holding SP in a larger amounts and has since whittled it back to an amount that still brings value to Steemit and Steemians. Everyone has different circumstances and one tries to do to what is best.
Here's wishing the best for you. Cheers.