I think I understand and appreciate both sides of the argument. But at the end of the day, in my gut I feel that the community speaks through upvoting, which is how this platform is designed, and the notion that someone with power can over-ride the will of the people with downvotes is extremely troubling.

And yet, if there is some kind of imbalance in the way the system works (for example, if someone’s work is upvoted primarily because he or she has achieved name recognition, regardless of the quality of the posts) then yes, it seems some kind of adjustment is needed. Who gets to make that call? What are the metrics of quality? Should any one person with an opinion about what constitutes quality content be allowed to take away from the value the community bestowed upon a contributor’s work? I don’t think so. I think there has to be a better way.

Also, who is to say whether this or that type of content has real value? The community. If there is a community on Steemit that believes fiction has value, then it does. And there is.

I believe in quality content, and in upvoting quality content. I take exception to the idea that types of content (with the exception of offensive content or hate-based content) may not belong here. Is photography good content but not haiku? Essays are fine, but not sonnets? Videos but not stage plays? I hope this works itself out and that those who create quality content, regardless of the genre, win in the end.