a social media platform marketed with claims that content creators and curators are paid for their contributions, but largely failing to actually perform as claimed,
.
yeah...it's pretty bad
.
.
In the ten months that I've been steeming I've only made 25 thousand dollars. I'm powering down now and withdrawing about five thousand a month.
.
Investment? ...only my time.
.
It's SO unfair...I was expecting SO much MOAH.
.
and further more..
.
everyone knows that Rome was built in a day.
I DEMAND instant gratification.
what do you MEAN that I have to work for it?
that's SO unfair.
I love this. :)
Clearly YMMV. However, you have been favored recently by the value of Steem more than doubling. This appreciation in the value of Steem is largely driven by accelerated adoption in the last month. In the event that Steemit either fails to continue to grow, or begins to decline, in the face of competition, your satisfaction might vary from your present assessment.
I clearly spoke in terms of the distribution of rewards, and provided a simple and powerful datum that exemplified the concentration in very few accounts.
Neither did I demand anything, particularly instant gratification, or decry work. You may recall I work for a living, and do not much consider finance at all, as my needs are simple, and met through my work.
I point out several factors which affect Steemit now, are debated by hundreds of Steemers who find them unsatisfactory, and discuss the implications for Steemit. Rather than address these points, you chose to imply that I was complaining unreasonably about my own personal financial rewards - which I did not even address.
It is not whether or not Steemit is unfair that even matters. It is that many Steemers now consider it unfair, and people do strongly favor fairness. However, they aren't wrong, as the rewards for work producing and curating content is almost exclusively directed to a handful of Steemers.
I have often agreed with you on other issues, but would appreciate it if you would respond to what I actually did say, rather than to make reply that insinuates I made statements I did not. Perhaps you differ as to expectations of what will happen to Steem in a competitive market, and saying that, and why you do, would help inform my, and other's, understanding of the issues.
Powering down and cashing out is an action I predict those anticipating Steemit faltering in a competitive market will undertake, and you state you are doing exactly that. I will note two things: 1) actions speak louder than words, and 2) it is cliche that folks talk a thing up when selling out of it, and there's even a term for that.
Relevant comment could clarify what you believe regarding those points I made, and not leave us with but your actions to interpret. Also, I personally would prefer that substantive and relevant comment, rather than insinuation I said things I didn't, comprise our conversation. It has heretofore, which is why I have come to expect it from you.
There are hordes of folks we could follow if we want to hear SJWs intent on slander and innuendo, and you and I don't follow them for reasons. I followed you because your opinions were based on fact and reason, and generally stated that way, because that's what I value.
Your comment is complete idiocy. It is incredibly obvious to me that rather than listen and address his issues, you'd prefer to try and degrade his character like a child. I suspect the reason behind this is because you are one of the plutocrats benefiting from the current system and don't want the truth to get out. You actually can't address his arguments, because they aren't flawed.