You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Adjust Your Expectations: Steemit Is Designed as a Lottery
This is a great post, but - I don't like writing that, yes, but, but - value is not only to be found in money, or any other charged number. And with that said, the contribution anyone one, whale or not, can make to this platform is to create dialogue. My own most successful post, back in August think, was a poem called Homer in Merionethshire. Top of the voter list was @berniesanders, and I spent weeks wondering what exactly about the poem he liked. Sigh. As you say, I'd won a welcome reward in the lottery.
I'm still captivated by the numbers, building the rep, but I'm not altogether sure that that is helping me to create. It might even be why I am not motivated to post so frequently. I'm searching for a better reason for commitment.
Sounds like you're starting to touch on motivational psychology. From what I've seen, regarding creative work, rewards tend to decrease motivation to continue creating. The different between intrinsic verses extrinsic motivation is really important, just as you describe. If you're willing to think about what someone else likes about your work for a week, that sounds like an extrinsic motivation to me. If on the other hand you value your work intrinsically, regardless of the external rewards, you motivations probably won't change much.
And yes, I get there is value outside of the $ (see my post on that). Numbers are just a way to keep score and communicate and think about value via language. That said, when it comes to steemit, that's pretty much it's distinguishing characteristic. Without the rewards (the money), why not just use Facebook, Medium, Reddit, etc? Yes, we've got that whole decentralized, no-censorship thing going on, but lately it seems people (on the whole) don't really care about privacy or censorship as much as maybe they should.
Thanks for commenting.
Privacy, censorship, and being monetized are factors that only matter when there are options. Steemit is but one option, and the plutocratic governance of it's economy is perhaps perceived as just as significant as the other factors.
Fairness is a feature that people, and even other animals, are highly sensitive to. As continuous new platforms are introduced to the market, the feature sets, environmental limitations, and economic pressures that impact adoption are targeting market segments of significance as available.
As platform features are largely dependent on the governmental imposition of each of these factors, it may take some time for platforms and environments to evolve until current platforms of choice are abandoned for preferable competitors.
Steemit's growth is an example of this happening.
What are some others?
The ones mentioned, that people are fleeing to Steemit from, and competition being developed, or that will be developed in the future.
It is those aspects of social media earlier mentioned that people dislike and Steemit doesn't exhibit that has driven people to Steemit. In the same way people will vote with their feet down the road, in a more competitive market, in which I want Steemit to lead.
Other platforms can be monetized, but economic rewards aren't built directly into the platform. Seems to me, currently, Steemit is the only game in town.
Yes. I agree, on that count.
Can you expect it to remain so? I don't.