Everyone can argue the color of Steem

Some people have wondered why there is so much Steem content on Steem and see it as a drawback in the system yet, it is quite a natural process and will continue while the foundations are setting. As I see it, there are a number of reasons for it but essentially it comes down to Steem being the one thing that ties us all together, no matter what our interest areas are. This means that while we can all have quite different backgrounds, we can all collect around a single point of content, engage and discuss it.

Everyone has an opinion about Steem.

Another reason is of course that with so few unique users, there is not a great amount of support for niche content which means that people tend to gather around the Steem watering hole to meet up and drink with friend and foe alike, similar to the lakes on the Savannah. From my own experience with content delivery, while I write across many topics and have done for a long time, it is still the Steem content that gets the most comments on average and, draws in the largest variety of people. I see this as a good thing.

As said, Steem is in the foundation stages and it is also an exploratory platform venturing into places social platforms haven't before, namely the social economics and personal finance areas. This is both a compelling use case for a social platform and, one that is filed with a lot of uncertainty in how best to tackle all of the different desires and alignment of incentives to satisfy stakeholders.

This is obviously another reason that Steem content is so popular to both produce and engage with because stake tends to be interested in the future of stake. After all, this is a Proof of Stake platform so the staked users are going to generally be active in understanding and developing the platform to serve their best interests. A lot of people see this as greed, but it is not the entire truth. I can get on to that at another point though.

The problem with so much Steem content however is that while people think that talking about Steem is going to get them more engagement and reward because they see others talking about it, there is a lot of competition and a relatively high knowledge barrier to entry into the market. I know that for me personally, it has taken a great deal of learning, trial and error and a lot of criticism faced to get to a point where I am comfortable that what I put forward is generally correct.

The main reason I have taken the journey however isn't just for engagement or reward, it is so I can understand the system better as for me, the best way to learn is to try to explain what I am learning to others and in so doing, compound the learning experience across my own social network. It speeds my learning, it speeds other's learning and, it helps us to together discuss and direct ourselves toward common understanding of motives and goals and potentially, find some solutions or at least, steps forward.

What I enjoy here is that I am able to do the work and actually be part of the discussions in an intelligent manner rather than only working on assumptions alone. This is personal direction, this is freedom. It doesn't mean that I will get my way (nor would that likely elicit a great result) but, it does mean that I have a chance of getting my views injected into the common conversation for some level of discussion. This is something that most people don't actually have any chance of doing in their walking lives.

In time, as more and more users come onto the platform and take a more consumer approach to the content here, discussion will shift away from Steem and only those who are actually interested in the direction will stay in the conversation. This is likely to be those with stake however as they are personally invested and have something to lose. Which means, those with stake are going to increasingly direct the conversation and direction while the majority of consumers who aren't interested in the day to day processes will be at the mercy of their decisions.

It looks a lot like the analog world doesn't it? Is this unfair? Not really considering that at least at the moment, anyone is able to be part of the discussion yet for most, they aren't interested in the learning nor groundwork required to build up a voice that puts forward valid argument. Everyone wants to be heard but, validity of voice is relevant. Those who want to be part of the discussions but aren't willing to understand the complexities discussed are unlikely to be taken seriously. Ever.

Again, is this unfair? Nope. While everyone is able to put their voice forward in the hope of being heard, no one has to listen or give recognition to that voice. This is something I believe people have to come to terms with when thy chose the things they want to do in life. While you do what you do, it doesn't mean anyone else in the world is going to care at all about it. It is up to you whether you require social feedback or you are happy enjoying it for the intrinsic pleasure of doing what you want.

This is also why the people that complain about putting a lot of effort into something for little reward are acting quite immaturely because they do not factor in that that is just the way of the world. If you are looking for reward, you are going to have to supply something that is under demand at a price people are willing to pay for it. If the market you target is small and has limited resources, you might have to settle for pats on the back from a few people interested. If you aren't happy doing what you are doing based on the results you get, who's issue is it?

But, back to the case at hand. The Steem content on this platform is what adds to the future direction of the technology and community yet many people only want to play in the areas they are concerned with. When they come across something that seems to go against their position, they will fight and argue as if they understand it all but, for many, it is like trying to explain the day when one has lived in an eternal night. One sided, lacking perspective.

But, everyone can argue the color of something without considering that the reason they argue is that they have a preference. They think they are arguing a strong case but what their bias is doing is diminishing the value of other points of view and raising their own and if this is done without understanding the ecosystem, it very quickly loses validity. Then, because they get ignored, they become bitter, angry and aggressive and blame those not listening, not their own weak position.

Now, if you are interested in learning about Steem, Steem is the best place to do it because there is so much content about it from all different levels of technological understanding. You can get a very good overview of the platform quite quickly. The trouble is of course that who do you trust? Well, everyone has a personal agenda so perhaps before taking a learning path, we should all find out what our own motives are. Easier said than done for most who are comfortable laying blame on others rather than exploring the biases in themselves.

Some people see me as some kind of cheerleader for Steem but I would suggest that those who do have not done the work to read my history here. There are currently 2500+ top level posts, go for it. You will find as much negative as positive but while I journeyed through the last two years, it became apparent to me that while I learned and things changed I started to see a great deal more potential than I had first realized. Potential is another term for possibility and then ties itself to probability and then of course - risk. Yep, there is a lot of risk in Steem, a great deal of uncertainty but for me, it is very much worth the effort and the investment.

For you? That is for you to work out for yourself. This is the thing with investing, it is personal, even when you take the advice of others. No one forces you to invest and no one is making you stay on Steem. This is an opt-in and an opt-out platform that due to the uncertain nature of it, isn't likely suitable for all people since most do not carry an entrepreneur or investment mindset and therefore are more risk averse. There is nothing wrong with risk aversion but when it comes to getting the rewards of risk takers, one can't complain that they got it and you didn't of you didn't take the same risks as them.

Remember, while high risk is often coupled with high reward, it is also intimately tied to high loss. The only advice I ever really give is, never invest with what you aren't willing to lose completely. This doesn't matter if it is money, time, Steem, ideas.. whatever.

We all have motives, we all have goals, we all have desires, we all are biased. If you think you are not, you are likely the most biased among us. Yep, I want Steem to do well, I want the moon and stars when it comes to price and I want to have the Steem in my wallet be worth a great deal more than it is today. The beauty is that I don't think there are many people out there that wish that their wallet was worth less than it is today which means, if I get what I want, so does everyone else who holds Steem.

How we get there is still open for discussion.

In my view, it is going to take many different paths and a whole lot of different actions. This is the beauty of a decentralized system as we don't have to conform to a one size fits all process, we can each create our own pathways, communities and developments. Some will succeed, some will fail. Again, that is the beauty of decentralization, failure need never be total and, those that survive can learn and absorb the costs of loss.

In my opinion, while not perfect, we are on a much better path than the current systems we have in place, the ones that are going to fail at cataclysmic levels at some point due to their authoritative weaknesses. Are you ready to pay the cost of that failure or are you willing to work to having a solution up and running before it arrives?

That is the ongoing conversation. You can argue if you want, whether anyone listens is likely to depend on the validity of your argument and the social capital you hold.

Taraz
[ a Steem original ]