How do we describe us?
I fully support Steemit and I enjoy the posts and the people, and I don't mean to be rude. But someone has just got to say it. Again.
We are not Wikipedia! Students and scholars value wikipedia as a secondary source that can be used to start their search for primary sources. Casual researchers around the world value the infomation gathered in it's pages even if they feel the need to check citations every now and then.
We are not Quora! I bring my questions to Quora and hope one of the great article writers decides to answer it FOR FREE!
We are not even Pinterest! I value the print I just downloaded for something I am designing, and this is what I saw in the image search that started this little rant
Most of the time, for many of the people, we are "Guess what I have in my pocket" or, "What I think is wrong with Steemit".
I know we have higher goals. But maybe some people don't quite understand. The value of STEEM is the value we place on it by voting for articles. If we vote for everything or anything, STEEM has no value. If we only vote for the best, STEEM can become the most valuable cryptocurrency, with people fighting for a chance to earn a few.
Please think before you vote.
I'll shut up now.
I think you are referring to bots auto-voting, already at 4 votes and I am the only view, so either 2 bots (minus your vote) or a combination of bots and people that vote without discernment, which is a problem.
And yes, right around the 30 minute mark, I will get a stack of votes from bots. Hopefully they follow me because they know I usually post articles with a real value.
Or simply because they know the value of curating profit posts solely for profit regardless of the post or if they read it, especially as they loath to comment and do the human ingredient.
Unfortunately , few of my posts earn any significant amounts.
It seems significant is of little importance to bots as they fight over pennies and fractions of that even in an effort to not "waste" their ever building voting power, relentlessly adding little value to the platform. That is off putting to a user with not a lot of computer literacy to see A LOT of people getting paid because of automation regardless of what the content is and invalidates the argument that we will police ourselves. Automation in a social network built around the principle that content creators are rewarded for curating and for content creation removes value from actually engaging in the system in a meaningful way and instead seems to not venerate reading, engagement, commenting, voting and curating because "o no my voting power is not being used".
I certainly agree with that. There are many different directions that Steemit could improve.
Well, that's another thing, but not why I posted.
I'm talking about people who choose to post, or vote for, cheap meaningless posts that have no intrinsic value. Explaining a new archaeological find has enduring value. A recipe has enduring value. Many of the posts in Trending have limited value at best.
You make a good point, but what is a cheap meaningless post to one may not be for another. If you only vote on what you find interesting, that can't be bad. I get your point though.
Agree on subjective values, but some posts loose their value when voting stops. Gambling posts in particular. There's no reason for them to be on the blockchain forever. No reason to delete them, really, but no one will be searching for old gambling posts five years from now.
My SP is so low that I simply vote because it's not going to add any value to any post really, so until I can gather more SP I am left to vote on comments and a lot of times alone as I am in the endeavor by simply showing my solidarity.
On top of that I spend weeks without clicking the Trending category, in fact today I went on there for such a brief time that I couldn't asses anything really, it was just an idle curiosity that got satisfied very abruptly after the forgettable content that's there, but reading others comments I have come across a couple other people talking basically about the same thing which brings me to the last point.
It seems that our downvotes are needed then to curtail the rampant crap which means my votes could actually be used for something worthwhile but at the same time I have neither the SP or the reputation to really throw my weight around and not suffer the war which it could cause, which is an awfully precarious situation I don't see value in, so I am left to staying out of Trending for now, unless some big ol' whale is willing to dawn some bucks on my account and rep to engage in a bit of policing, but knowing myself and knowing the whales @jamesc, @ned, @dantheman, @dan, @abit, I doubt they will speculate on me (hatchetface), so until then I have to grind and continue on my crusade in my own way.
I ABSOLUTELY AGREE. I'm getting sick and tired of all these articles that can be found elsewhere on the internet. It's especially hard to see those posts earning even more than original posts (Steemit-exclusive, no less). Unless those articles have 80% original thought or reaction, and 20% information you can find elsewhere, I strongly believe that they have no business being here.
I've put up with them just to be "neighborly", but we really have to draw the line and say that enough's enough. Their draining the STEEM pool without any effort. I really wish initiatives could be done to moderate this.
How about...
Steemit: Create and consume. Give and receive. Get paid for it.
I draw the line at the straight copy & past stuff.
With out any thought reflection or review of the pasted article.
Any time I have used a article from the Web. I get a visit from my favorite scamp, Cheetah.
This I do not mind. As I have a view/reason for publishing the article that caught my interest.
I will add my 2 cents and then the article.
Asking people for votes for a click and paste jobbie should not be the Steemit way.
But again, if that is what the majority of Steemies want......
That true