"Crab mentality" reminds me of a very simplistic dynamic that often happens in groups and workplaces... someone decides they want to lose weight and get fit, but even though all their co-workers say "Way to Go!" they passive-aggressively push for failure by suddenly bringing lots of donuts, pizza, fattening snack food and "reasons" to go to happy hour rather than go for a run.

Finding the right mix of "merit based" and "seniority based" has to be a tricky balance, I won't deny that. From what I have seen in my seven weeks on Steemit, part of the problem here seems to be that there's no clear mission statement defining what Steemit IS. Sure "it's a social blogging/content platform wrapped around an alt coin, all blackhain based, with expansion space for lots of exciting apps we haven't yet created."

Sure, that's a nice concept; a nice ideology but what does that functionally look like? "Facebook on the blockchain?" Or is it"a repository of high quality information for people moving towards the New Economy?" Or is it "a social content outlet for creative writers, bloggers, artists, musicians and other creative types?" Or maybe it's "a hangout for anarchists and blockchainiacs?" What is considered "valuable," and what is not? Where's the benchmark metric against which we evaluate whether we're going in the right or wrong direction?

Or are we just tossing a handful of grass clipping up in the breeze to see where they might land?

Saying "all of the above" is really not a valid answer... and saying "this is UNIQUE, nothing like this has ever been done before!" is also a platitude/copout.

I'm not a developer or cryptogeek... I'm just a content creator. So I can only speak from my perspective... and what I DO know is that if Steemit is to be some kind of "social content" venue, we (a) need more social features, (b) need to place more value on manual peer curation, (c) need to accept that if we want a QUALITY venue that attracts people, this does have to be somewhat of a meritocracy (cream floats, junk sinks), and (d) we have to be very cautious about how the platform is opened to the greater world. The long term survival rate (not "success" rate) of user-generated content sites with rewards is about 3%, because too many people want "money for nothing," and host sites are too chickenshit (pardon my bluntness!) to install curation algorithms biased towards rewarding quality.

Thanks for an interesting and thoughtful post... check your "tip jar."

Makes me wonder if it's possible to implement not only a "tip jar" function, but to somehow tie people's voluntary contributions into part of the algorithm for the tip jar owner's overall reputation...