RE: Ok, I Have A Problem With People Having A Problem With Steemit
If you're referring to me, then I would suggest a re-read of my post. It isn't "FUD." It's simply a critical view about the surprisingly slow speed of development of even the smallest of tweaks. I received a comment from Ned in chat that it was a good post, so take that however you wish.
Also - being on a blockchain does not excuse the lack of minimal features on the UI, such as a template for a profile page. A professional developer - or a team of them - could figure that out rather quickly. Many of the features can be handled by adding/improving tabs and redirecting content. It's not like anyone is asking for an entirely new, dynamic website to be built from scratch.
And if you're concerned about my intentions, feel free to look at how I have been powering up - even as whales continue to power down and the price continues to drop. I have removed from my wallet a grand total of 20 SD in over three months. I have been asked to believe in Steemit and to trust the leadership. I think I have every right to express my concerns about their plans, their level of communication, and how I see things going. It seems that a lot of people agree with me as well. Obviously, you do not. I'm not sure how that makes me stupid and toxic.
Hi, first of all, yes, it was your article that created the impulse, but no, I'm not implying that you as a person are stupid (even did a search on my own article and couldn't find that word written by me). But the constant pressure on the developers and the constant critique of the Steemit founders is something toxic. I will detail how is this toxic a few paragraphs below.
I will also want to make it clear from the beginning that all people are ok for me and what I'm not agreeing with, sometimes, might be their actions. But as a whole, all people are ok. So please don't be offended and, most of all, don't take it personally.
Now, the tone of your article is something quite common (especially since the price went down), and my reaction built up for many weeks, it just happened that your article was the trigger.
I will try, though, in the spirit of transparency and common effort, to state my opinion on some of the suggestions you made.
UI versus Backend
Strategically speaking, I think backend is way more important now. Why? Because we're a small lot, and if the word goes around quickly and a lot of people will join at once, we will have a very, very big problem. One that will be very, very difficult to amend on the fly. One that has to be prevented. I had my thoughts about the scalability of the blockchain as a backend and I was relived when I saw @dantheman articles about ChainBase. It's way more important to be prepared once the number of users grows with another zero, than to have a better UI now. In fact, a better UI could attract more people and, if the backend can't cope, now that will be really bad. Better an ugly site that works, than a beautiful one that doesn't work (or that don't exist at all, yet, like Synereo or other projects).
Security
I don't think you're aware of that, but Steemit was undergoing a few attacks (some of them quite recent). The latest was a white spam attack, trying to mimic a DDOS (commenting every 20 seconds until the blockchain will fill up). I think the issue is being addressed right now. But this is the kind of problems that are very common now and that we, as end users, might not be aware of. Strategically, though, for the founders, these are more important. Again, it's better to have an ugly site that is secure, than a a beautiful one that it isn't.
Tone Of Voice
The abundance of articles about how Steemit has a problem is really toxic. It's not enough that the technology is new, that the vision is disrupting, we need to have now something even more disturbing, implying for newcomers that there is a problem with the site. Like they don't have enough reasons to believe that this is a scam. Again, your intentions may be really good and I'm sure you want to create value, in your own way, but the tone of voice is not helpful. It's like going on the street and shouting: "guys, I have this wonderful apartment that I want to share with you, but you know, it's really bad, it stinks and it doesn't have running water and so on, but please come and join me, let's make my apartment great again". This tone of voice doesn't attract users. I don't imply that we should put under the carpet the shameful stuff, I'm all for transparency. I'm implying that there isn't any shameful stuff to being with.
Hopefully my position is better now. Again, you shouldn't take this personally, although it was indeed your article that triggered my impulse.
I actually agree in large part with both articles. I thought @ats-david's article had good and important insights, and I thought it offered constructive suggestions - even if it was a bit harsh in tone. @dantheman and @ned are big boys. I'm sure they can manage to separate the tone from the message. I even seem to recall a not dissimilar article by @dragosroua in reference to the 30 day payout limit, which I also thought offered valuable feedback.
I recently reviewed Amazon.com's 14 leadership principles. Principle #1 was to obsess over the customer. Steemit.com needs this sort of feedback in order to have any idea at all what the customer is thinking.
On the other hand, all too many articles here are nothing more than rants that highlight problems (real or imagined) without proposing solutions. Even those posts have value, but if the proportion of them is too high, they will harm the platform.
As a general rule, the solution to speech that we don't like or agree with is often more speech, not to try to shut people up. If someone writes an article that we disagree with, or that we feel lacks context, then we can offer corrections or framing (in a cordial way) so that new users aren't overwhelmed by the negativity.
Very nicely put. The solution is always more speech. I was glad to see @ats-david reacting so fast and I answered to his comment here. But I stand by my words: the whining is becoming toxic.
And you're right, I voiced my own concerns in an article, but then I went further, engaging in discussions with influencers and creating an issue on Github. Devs responded to that, end of story.