RE: Steemit Update
With all due respect that is one of the worst conclusions someone could come up with from my comment. The lack of his attention in the situation described was an example to illustrate where @ned is failing and has nothing to do with me "wanting an upvote". You should read things a little better before you try to dismiss the argument with such a shallow argument.
And I know of many people that focused on building the community, but many of them felt they were working against management. If you are afraid of the truth being stated online, then I'm the wrong person to speak to. Steemit is failing not due to any sentiments of any users, but because they are currently failing to listen to the users. The ones that are trying to give them advice on how to fix that are "helping them".
And please don't insult me again by twisting words to make me look shallow.
I'm sorry if you feel insulted by my conclusions, but I don't think it's anything to get mad over. I didn't try or want to insult you or anyone so maybe you shouldn't feel insulted so easily. Maybe you were just in a bad mood a bit? IDK You just could've opened a further discussion and explain without getting arrogant. < Didn't deserve this imho. :/
I get what you're saying with your second paragraph though, because as a community builder, I've felt the same. I mean I like to build a community on Steem, but then again I've felt a thousand times that why doesn't Steemit do it themself or am I even allowed to do that on my own.
As I've understood, decentralization stands for community running things and therefore Steemit has let us do that, not doing much themself. At one hand, that makes Steem decentralized, no? Please correct me if I'm wrong.
I fully am fine with Steemit letting us build our own community and don't care if they ever market things or spend resources on helping make the community vibrant. I do however care that they make rules that make it almost impossible for people to stay. The implementation of HF20 and the introduction of RCs (which limited certain functions based on what THEY deemed important) was a disaster. People that sign up now have limits of 10 (or less) comments a day. I know some people think that's perfectly ok, but they essentially killed making this a mass adoption social platform. If that's what they want, they should just tell us. I have spent a year trying to get people to stay involved because of the "potential" to go viral, but that one decision makes it an impossibility. NOTE: for those that claim there is a cost to running the blockchain, my answer to that is these limits on any particular function are purely arbitrary. Why limit the thing new users care most about unless you are either 1) trying to kill it or 2) so out of touch that you have no idea what its like to be a new member that's learning for the first time how this place works.
ps... I don't want to argue with you about the point where you say I felt insulted. Its not important.