3 Realizable Utopias for Steemit

3 Realizable Utopias for Steemit

One Realizable Technological Utopia and Two already working Social Utopias for Steemit

Before publishing my next post on steemit, with the strange name of "Can Steemit be a Gandhi Phenomena?", that is carefully being written and deals with the analysis in mathematical terms by one side with the infinite possibilities of communication and objects transactions made possible by the blockchain and the known limits of perceptual and genetic limitations of the individual in big groups to sustain unlimited transactions with any number of people and objects.

The polarization in smaller groups that can keep the Vision and Mission of Steemit, empowered by discussion and proposals, as well as increased creativity and innovation for changing and benefiting all the community, and lose the effect of feeling powerless in a big anonymous group.

Introduction

To start i would like suggest to read my last three posts, Do Blockchain communities have a "Critical-Group" ?, Is the blockchain a "Hierarchical" or an "Equalitarian" Community?, Is the blockchain a Realizable Social Utopia?, for a better understanding the view of theoretical mathematical model that any observer can use to measure societies as man and objects inside structures (Hierarchical or Equalitarian ) with people interacting and influencing people and interrelating with objects (things)

Voting power that inside steemit is still regulated by the actual state of development of all the society, where objects (steem power money, things) possession is still a hierarchic structure, and not yet a realizable utopia of equality.

This model can bring light to the understanding of the crucial turning point in the history of steemit because we must always remember that we have to deal with it right now because:

"The future is dealing with the problems and errors we made in the past, turning the past in a consequence determined by the future."- charlie

This post doesn't have any objective of pointing or attacking people or group actions, the only purpose is to generate insights, not fights.

My objective is to help to open discussion and philosophical reflections on the path of steemit community to be the best model of social media-based economy attention and dedication on the blockchain, as stated in the roadmap of Steemit:

"It is our belief that in our attention economy, more readers, reading more writers, performing more interactions is the single best way to develop the overall value of and to the community, and thus the Steem Blockchain and its economy and token."

To change behavior and attitudes of people they must get involved in the construction of the utopia because sanctioning people leaves to ostracization, isolation, and no change at all, because change comes from inside when you act, and not by outside pressure, fear or criticism.

This is addressed to people that wants to now more and get involved on Steemit, joining the emerging guilds or other natural smaller community groups, that want to make this a beautiful utopia came true and shape a better future for all Steemians.

We don't want a Facebook or Twitter-like hierarchical and totally centralized community, producing garbage content and to have 1.000 "friends", gathering millions of users with small contributions and no return and a limited capacity to change perceived reality, that by excess of numbers inevitably makes it an hierarchical centralized society, losing totally the quality of utopia.

"There is no urban utopia, just smaller cultural rural alike communities to adapt to the anonymity of the cities". charlie

As the main group size start to increase, non-ethical behaviors and cheats are much more difficult to detect.

As a positive reaction to this kind of model, steemit has seen the emergence of small growing sub-communities, that are polarizing but replicating the initial Equalitarian group, making possible the continuation of a realizable non-paternalist utopia, avoiding the alternative of steemit turn into a total hierarchical paternalistic society to stop the dream to come true.

In some guilds I already see a equalitarian structure like the one we want for steemit with multi-decentralized curating sub-guilds working independently, but maintaining the vision, mission and strategy of the all guild, making it very functional and creative, and giving all the guilders a big sense of participation and involvement and even a different way to get perceived value for their work.

On the other hand we are risking that some groups with self-interests dictated by money, want to create the illusion in some members that Steemit to "a-free-money-for-all" dystopia without participation is possible, but they are being deceived, because this groups are the only beneficiaries of people blindness and not the all community.

So maybe actual guilds need new ideas to make the members of the community engage more on building the platform, because comments and discussion in my posts are more important than rewards and votes without views and are the support pillars of Steemit growth.

It is the influence of objects that makes Steemit an Hybrid Society, expressing the mechanisms of a possible myriad of small equalitarian groups, but mediated by objects that are still an hierarchic pyramid in all society.

"The human brain is an emotional machine, it has a memory limit known as Dunbar's number, and it is designed to mutate based on the connections it makes. As it is a mutational meme-machine, the human brain can only be loyal to and maintain consensus about a limited number of ideas/laws at a time" - The Dunbar Number, From the Guru of Social Networks

If a Flagging Button war starts, that could make steemit look like a cemetery full of Tombs in cyberspace forever on the blockchain (perpetuity and ubiquity).

If a Mute button war arises, every ignore is a brick in the wall of a Tower we are building around us, and can make steemit became a big field of High Towers with people closed inside them and shouting to be heard.

If Bots or votes without reading or curating keep on growing, Steemit will became a ghost town, with some ghosts(bots) still living in it.

Steemit can be a model of the future in the blockchain for a more just society , because for me the real meaning of Justice is Equality and not the point of view of the Power as it is today.

1- Project change Voting Tool - A technological Utopia

"Sage is the one who knows that something may not work, and yet he does it" - Kung-Fun-Tsé

Please note that I don't have enough knowledge to understand the steemit economy, it this is just my opinion as a naive person that is trying to understand this beautiful palace I can only see from the outside now.

As I posted in my article Is the blockchain a "Hierarchical" or an "Equalitarian" Community? . free and open knowledge brought the possibility of a social non-paternalist equalitarian society in relation to the influences of man, and a possibility to find ways for the future the utopia of a better redistribution of objects generating a lower hierarchic pyramid in the gap of wealth and possession.

In the blockchain singularity and technological Utopia, where the world of Objects is still hierarchic, doesn't bring the solution to this problem of egalitarianism.

For me voting on steemit is a tool for users - readers, writers, and curators - and a strategical asset for blogging, reading, and curating content and not people.

So I don't see on Steemit road map any mentions to users called "voters"(intelligent agents human or not), that can vote on People, without even viewing, commenting or curating the Content king, that I think was the original intent of its use for Readers and Writers.

This so-called "voters" are draining the pool of rewards using the vote tool as a way to maximize profit and minimized attention or intervention in the construction of the values of the community, that can turn steemit into an industry to make money for same instead of content production.

"Voters" (intelligent agents human or not) do not vote on content they vote on people, which was not the intended in the original use of the voting tool.

So I think that if we upvote for a post we should make a View first because it doesn't make sense to me as a writer or commenter to get 200 votes and 12 views.

This means an economy of "zero attention" generating profit against all the principles of the new "e-conomics" philosophy on the blockchain communities.

"largest problems currently presented to social media services: the dichotomy between maintaining a high Signal-to- Noise Ratio (SNR) for a quality content experience free of spam and low-value comments, whilst simultaneously preventing any type of censorship. "

* in Steemit roadmap*

The Technological Utopia

The voting power should have some factor of increased power for everybody, based in some more variables, that could motivate people to change their behavior and became more pro-active members of the community. and maybe solve the problem of actual discontent of lots of people feeling.

Reputation could be a criteria that could also make part of the reward equation (forgive if I'm not right and comment please, to make me learn).

Vests +[Reputation (votes + votes given + downvotes ) + Views + Number of posts + Number of comments + Number of replies].

Or another proposal we could take Vests out of the equation because voting power already have it embedded and resolving the big gap of rewards existing actually on steemit, to give a chance to the ones that don't have material power to make his vote more meaningful but it could resukt in the future voting-machine just for profit and "zero actions", because users could be replaced by bots only.

Another strategy could be a way to reward meaningful comments, so that readers and curators could be engage more and feel rewarded..

If Steemit can be a realizable social utopia by reorganizing in smaller communities with the same goals, but only in the condition that people who lead the guilds or smaller groups are true activists that embrace the idea of sharing the same needs and solutions for everybody.

I'm approaching dangerous territory here, so before reading the phrases bellow, keep in mind that the solution of disinvesting or diminishing Voting Power in Steemit, would deny the foundation parameters of deals with investors (not ICO) and creators, that would lead to the dissolution of the platform for breaking public contracts.

I would like to remind you the concept of Stakeholders on steemit is not clear or well defined, so I'll take the definition of my post Steemit Value : Intangible Asset vs Tangible Asset Analysis the main groups of stakeholders should be : readers, bloggers, content curators, witnesses, miners, investors, supporters and alliances, etc.

Voting power from whales, if in the future we could have friendly integrated profitable organizations that would bring other forms to get back the revenue of the money of investors that made the dream possible, and accept to change their contracts in their own will, that steemit will always have to honor as crucial factor of future survival of the platform.

Decentralized investors revenue from the chain of steemit generated value by content creators, making value exchange only based on Reputation of real attention to the platform in an equalitarian structure of objects (money, vests,things).For now this is not a feasible utopia regarding the external legal and ethic constraints of the company that owns steemit and reality constraints.

So the question of equal voting for all is not a realizable utopia yet on the blockchain in relation to objects or possessions as a still prevailing law for all society..

Now I can explain how this could make the biggest revolution of the World by the blockchain creating one chain for investors, one for users and everybody would be happy.

Or they get a percentage of all global activity of the actual users of steemit. separating power from profit generation for investors.

Or some gathered groups could associate and buy from whales on steemit an redistribute it :) .

But we could have the most bigger decentralized utopia in relation to objects on Steemit and all the blockchain by disconnecting Voting power from Vests possession and just base it in Reputation.

The blockchain and Steemit is not, and can't be for now, a decentralized platform in relation to objects (vest power), because it is not yet feasible in actual development of society and even in the anarcho-capitalist theories, because they still believe in the principle of private property.

The conflict of self-interest guilds based on money and the equalitarian guilds based on people, actually is also a reflection the conflicts of the emanating from the conflict between creators and investors and ideals.

On the other hand we didn't resolve yet the problem of all people who invested at $4 , that surely feel discontent with their situation, but Steemit was a very new way of investing High Risk capital, but I hope for the best of every Steemian this problem could be solved by growing the platform but with quality control of content, that the small groups are already doing.

And my token of admiration for all good content creators that are still motivated, besides the actual value of steemit reward.

For the "voters only" that left steemit, my condolences because it proved that voting in people not in content, is a "zero-profit" economy for "zero attention".

2 - Project Rich Quality Content Improvement (@steem-guild-better)

First I've to say that I was writing this post for seven days and since I started the ideas above they are all already structured, working and bringing more value for rich content creation and careful curating.

Some very interesting guilds are generating coins for content quality improvement, but at the same reward users with guild-coins besides steem, for participation in tasks that can help to improve this flourishing community of readers and writers that are enriching the global value of steemit world of this new economy-valued-attention.

That is now an alternative for people that can't get value back for their actions and receive a coin token for making new quality content and already rewarding good comments.

This is typically a project that can be implemented by any curation guild working on improving the quality of content in Steemit and involve people

Preventive and ethical use of curation by groups or guilds to improve the overall quality of rich content on Steemit, for readers, writers, and curators.

User for example user **steem-guild-better** could be charged with SP donations from the guild or other contributors.

Post and comment-advert to users that if they change some of the suggestions made, he is pre-qualified to be rewarded by the guild.

The collective user representing the guild or group propose the changes they want to see in the post, and if the writer makes the desired corrections that the guild will upvote the post.

The post contains for example 7 to 9 rules that make better posts and the suggestion should be changed in points 2, 4, and/or 7, for example,

1 - The punctuation of the article should be corrected
2 - The grammar may have some issues, use www.grammarly.com to help.
3 - Image Sources
4 - Citations to all the Phrases witout "commas" in it
5 - Remove commercial links
6 - Tagging is incorrect in relation to the subject
7 - Small possibe Plagiarism of some phrases that must be mentioned check with www.qutext.com
8 - Photo(s) not related to content.
9 - ....

Critics and improvements have to made allways mentioning first a good quality and then the thing we want to change.Note this is a risky job in Steemit

3 - Project start Publish and Curating **user** steem-guild-grow

Guilds shoul find ways to make reception of new users writing the "introduce yourself" post, by giving some votes, and show the way for ethical behaviour and rules in publishing, and motivate to get them involved

Tokens for changes in behaviour with proppositions for rewards by tasks.

i.e. "This guild is ready to support your work if you create posts or comment articles, and for that task you will receive x Guild-coins".

With polarized sub-guilds of the total voters of the total guild voters, just to deal with the subject.

Invite people to join the guild-trail of the steemit tag they would like to help curate.and for that task you will receive xxx Guild coins for giving your attention to Curation

If you bring a friend to Steemit, and he makes a good first post besides introduced youself you will be botth rewarded with 5 trails

Guilds can be used as node witnesses of consensus in good-proof-of-content creation :)

Footnote:

(*) I choose the term Equalitarian for a vision that accepts or promotes the view of equalitarianism , instead of Egalitarian a vision who accepts or promotes social equality and equal rights for all people because that is not yet possible in the material hierarchic structure of our world of objects and assets.

My other posts on Steemit about the blockchain

Do Blockchain communities have a "Critical-Group" ?

Is the blockchain a "Hierarchical" or an "Equalitarian" Community?

Is the blockchain a Realizable Social Utopia?

An Ode to the blockchain - the Dialectic of Liberation

Steemit: Vision, Mission, Values and Strategy

Steemit Value : Intangible Asset vs Tangible Asset Analysis

Steemit: Altruism and Financial Scarcity and the rise of Advertising

Steemit : The Shrinking of the Money Pie and the Rise of Human Pie

B/W Pictures Source:

All black and white hand writing pictures included in the slides, are originally copied from the book - "Utopias Realizáveis" - (Realizable Utopias )by Yona Friedman , Sociocultur, Lisbon, 1977 (in Portuguese)

References:

(1) Yona Friedman - wikipedia : Architect, urban planner, designer but also a sociology student, physics and science communications, Yona Friedman (Budapest, 1923) is back at the center of international architectural culture after having long been dismissed as Utopian. Member of the Hungarian anti-Nazi resistance, Friedman spent a few years in Haifa, Israel, where he sketched the first of his many theories, namely the Mobile Manifesto architecture in which special construction systems allow the inhabitant to determine for itself the shape, style etc. his apartment and to change it when they want it.

website: Yona Friedman

Interview with Yona Friedman: "Imagine, Having Improvised Volumes ";Floating" In Space, Like Balloons"

Yona Friedman 1000+ photos - Pinterest

Books:

Utopies réalisables by Yona Friedman

Comment vivre entre les autres sans être esclave et sans être chef, J.J. Pauvert, Paris, 1974

The Politics of Utopia: A Study in Theory and Practice By Barbara Goodwin, Keith Taylor

One Video among hundreds : Yona Friedman: You are obliged to stay Mainstream

Other related posts on Steemit:

Exceeding the Limits of Interaction in a Community Leads to Control