Speak Truth to Power Tuesdays: Some speculative 'truths' about Steemit, and what can be done

in #steemit6 years ago

tim-marshall-114623-unsplash.jpg

Steemit is not a meritocracy. There's really no sense in which the best posts, even broadly construed, are getting to the top of trending, or even the top of their respective tags, with any regularity.

That said, without content that people actually want to read, the only people on Steemit would be investors, shit-posters, or people who are both of these things at the same time. This does not sound to me like a formula for sustained long-term growth. If audience growth stalls, then investors will become increasingly worried about the money they have put in, and new investors may be more cautious in their approach. If the amount of new money coming into the Steem ecosystem stalls before it reaches the right economy of scale, the whole system could become exceptionally vulnerable.

The system is stacked against us, and yet, it needs us.

If you are a struggling writer/artist/filmmaker/musician/essayist etc., Steemit is probably not your ticket to financial independence, not at this point anyway. If you are starting now, the only way to make a lot of money from Steemit, right now, is to already have a lot of money to invest. Money, or having the luck or foresight to get involved in Steem right at the start, trumps talent and hard work every time, due to the availability of paid upvoting services and high SP self-voting.

It follows from this that new Steemians with less purchasing power will, in general and regardless of talent, make less money here. This will likely impact most heavily upon people who are economically marginalised, and come from developing nations (doubly so if their fiat currency is relatively weak).

Steemit is not a way around structural inequality and geopolitical disadvantage; it is, at the moment, a reflection of existing economic and social arrangements.

On Steemit, the infrastructure might well be decentralised, but power, and the ability to affect real change, is not. The average person (or, I should say, median, since the distribution of SP is so unequal) on Steemit can no more challenge a whale by themselves than the average citizen can challenge a multi-national corporation or government agency without powerful individuals or collective power structures to support them.

Some witness voters matter more than others. Because witness votes get more powerful with SP, most votes are worth very little by themselves when compared to bigger players. Some people think this is why certain behaviour from well-connected individuals is tolerated - because a certain whale changing their votes could tip quite a few people out of the top 20 witness spots. However, many high-ranking witnesses also rely on these smaller votes. Thousands of minnows abandoning a witness could make as much difference as one whale. Get to know who you are voting for and review their performance regularly. If you are unhappy with it, tell them. Not all witnesses realise it yet, but if Steem becomes one of the big social media networks, their positions will be increasingly political. Failure to understand this could be a cause of future risk to the Steem network.

I have trouble believing that Steemit was ever intended as anything other than a capitalist structure that sought to cut out a certain amount of middlemen who stood between the people spending money on content, and those who produce it. No one who honestly believed that merit was more important than invested or accumulated monetary stake would have designed such a system. The alternative is that that those who designed the system, as well as those who maintain it, believe that the people who do the best out of capitalist free-market systems are in fact the best people and deserve to be winning at the expense of those they tread on in order to succeed. Neither view should be unfamiliar to those with an interest in the history of industrial relations.

The bottom line is that, for whatever reason, Steemit does not reward content producers, especially those who produce quality output, in a manner commensurate with their importance to the network. It also further embeds structural disadvantage and injustice, predominately along existing class, socioeconomic and geopolitical lines.

What can be done about any of this?

In some way, we are stuck with certain structures and ways of thinking because of how the system was designed. But there are lots of ways to work within the system to moderate its excesses without destroying it by bringing in the equivalent of a Stalinist dictatorship.

As I was discussing with @deliberator last week, we could do something like the following:

Voluntary income inequality reduction

Have a voluntary collective of steemians where everyone puts a set percentage - say 10% - of their weekly SBD earnings into 'the pot'. That total amount of SBD is then divided equally amongst all members and distributed back to them. Basically, high earners get back less than their 10%, and low earners get back more than their 10%. Personally, I wouldn't redistribute SP, as high-SP individuals are needed to defend against malicious flagging and keep hungry whales at bay.

The exact rules of such an organisation will need to address problems with scammers and cheats. Nor could it have too many members that earn too little. So, it would require rigorous registration requirements. Real repercussions for scams and plagiarism (collective downvotes, exclusion etc.) would be essential. Fraud or disguising of income could not be tolerated and would have to be punished exceptionally severely.

For this to really work, you need people to understand that the more everyone earns, the more they get from the scheme. It is in the interest of lower-earning members to upvote each other - and collect the curation from the posts from their higher earners. It's also in the interest of the highest earners to get the post payouts and SP of the lower-earners as high as possible as soon as possible. This would almost certainly involve education and mentoring, as well as a bit of strategic voting and deployment of bidbots and SP-leasing.

For someone clever enough to code this to make the administration of this efficient enough to support a large membership, there are real advantages. You could make voting for a particular witness a membership requirement (as #TeamAustralia does). Again - benefit increases benefit - the more the SP of the group rises, the more their witness votes count and the higher the recipient of them rises in the witness ranks.

Throw in the ability of the membership to delegate some of its SP to a single individual, and you've got a possibility to do some pretty interesting stuff.

I can't see this working without minimum activity levels, but requirements in terms of quality control could vary from one collective to the next. Set the bar too low and you get scammers and shit-posters looking for a free ride without contributing, and your high-earners leave. Set the bar too high, and you never attract a large enough membership to make a big impact. Collectives could be themed or not, from common backgrounds or not, have similar political ideals, or not.

Yes, this could all be prone to misuse. But the mechanisms that Steem gives us can be put to good use. People can withdraw their delegations and take back their witness votes. High SP members can wield enough power to stop a flood of low-SP bad actors from ruining everything - if nothing else they can abandon the collective and take their earning power with them. But these high earners should proceed carefully. While minnows can't always lower a whale's reputation, having hundreds of people loathing you enough to constantly troll your every post and sell you out to your rivals could be inconvenient.

You are a worker, start acting like it!

The other idea for changing things on Steemit is not new at all - in fact, it sits at the core of almost every advance in worker's rights and conditions: Withholding your labour. Yes, you could just go on strike in order to get a better deal from the system that pays you for your work.

What I can't figure out is what is the best way to do this on Steemit. The system is set up to psychologically discourage this sort of thing. True, you won't earn money from posting if you don't post, or curation if you don't vote. But (depending where you are from) when your ancestors won the rights that employees take for grated today, they largely didn't get paid either. Suck it up!

Either way, if enough people stopped posting - just for 24 hours - this would send a message. But it has to be coordinated, so it isn't lost in the noise and natural variation. If you could get 10% of regular posters to all stop posting and voting for the same 24 hour period, I can guarantee that plenty of the big stakeholders would be shitting bricks!

There are lots of variations on protest actions that don't always involve total withdrawal of labour. And guess what, after a few years as a union activist, I know how to do most of them, and can talk to people who know the rest. Options include:

  • Working to get particular protest-themed tags trending;
  • Have a protest/demand-themed footer that you use on all of your posts - even better if everyone uses the same one
  • Periodically post protest messages;
  • Refuse to post anything other than a particular protest message for a certain time (which could give @cheetah conniptions, but I'd be willing to risk it);
  • Get a stack of people to vote and/or chip in enough SBD to get your demands on the tending page. I don't have a spare 400 SBD. But I bet, with a little effort, I could organise 100 pissed-off people to throw in 4 SBD each for something like this.

To be most effective, you combine multiple protest measures - either sequentially, or at once. E.g., lots of people post occasional protest messages for a week, then they spend a day or two posting the same protest message (or variations thereof to avoid accusations of spamming), then spend two days withholding all posts and votes, except to boost your demands to the front page. As follow-up, consider a protest-themed footer.

Yes, things could get tense. And maybe some pro-business/anti-worker types will get pissy about poor people not bowing down to our natural rulers. But really, what's the alternative? You could just go and spend the time you are posting here and getting pissed off working and earning actual money, or just plain doing something you enjoy - which is more fun and will lead to a longer and happier life. Herein lies an important fact that makes Steemit politics different to national politics: We can just leave. If none of this works and we are denounced for not being capitalist enough or for making a nuisance of ourselves, we power down, sell our liquid assets into other currencies, and generally tell the Steem hierarchy to go fuck itself (even if we still stay friends with individuals that we've met and bonded with during our time here).

This is why Steemit, and everything that runs on Steem, has to work for the people who work for it by producing content. It has to keep us happy enough to stay. Because leaving Steemit is a lot easier than leaving a country and changing your citizenship. I'm not sure how may people would have to leave to make a difference. But remember, we only have about 60,000 daily active users, so I bet it wouldn't be much. And before you say that there will always be other people to replace us, let me make two points: You are an individual, and are not replaceable. Other social media companies, and the old media in general, would like to either crush or control things like Steemit. Would they like to tempt you back? Yes. Would they mysteriously promote stories/posts/articles/videos about how terrible Steemit was. I don't know for sure, but if enough people started saying the same thing, you can bet someone like Zuckerberg or one of his minions would hear about it.

Do @ned and the rest of the people who hold the concentration of power here know this? I suspect that they do. But there's only one way to find out, and that's for the smaller stakeholders to act in in unison to change the situation. What I have outlined is just two of the ways this could happen.

So there you have it. A rant that is vastly longer than I intended. Upvotes and resteems (if you are brave enough) are appreciated, comments and feedback doubly so.

Thanks for reading.

Photo by Tim Marshall on Unsplash

Sort:  

I have trouble believing that Steemit was ever intended as anything other than a capitalist structure that sought to cut out a certain amount of middlemen who stood between the people spending money on content, and those who produce it. No one who honestly believed that merit was more important than invested or accumulated monetary stake would have designed such a system. The alternative is that that those who designed the system, as well as those who maintain it, believe that the people who do the best out of capitalist free-market systems are in fact the best people and deserve to be winning at the expense of those they tread on in order to succeed. Neither view should be unfamiliar to those with an interest in the history of industrial relations.

@bifilarcoil have you two been chatting? LOL
but on a serious note - this is a huge issue and I'm SO happy to see conversations going on about this - sorry I missed the payout for this but regardless this is the noose around all our necks.. we need to escape it before it closes completely.
So many of us have this vision for Steemit as a place of sharing, equality and a well deserved payment for our hard work. I know I saw this as a place where I could finally get paid for doing what I love and I think if we get our great minds together (there ARE so many of us who are like minded in this) we can come up with some real solutions! I hope to hear this fight will continue!
Thank you @samueldouglas for shining a light into the dark corners of Steemit so we can all see it for what it is and make the necessary changes. I DO NOT support an oligarchy ! We call know trickle down economics is bullshit let's not allow it to damn up this platform.

I only have had a few chat's with @samueldouglas, and i like Sams ideas a lot as they are very concrete and constructive. Yet i'm wondering how they can be implemented as i don't have a lot of insights in how this works technically on this platform.

Steemit is like the 'Choose Life' passage in 'Trainspotting'
Not sure if anyone will understand the real depth that passage.
I'm not sure i'm myself have figured it all out yet. :-) As it turns the 'Choose Life' slogan on it's head several times in a row.


It's everything
that results to nothing
for everyone but the one who came up with the idea.

@bifilarcoil

Definite different views of steemit, but that is okay. I myself do not feel tread upon by anyone, in fact I have been having an absolutely wonderful time on steemit. I have read a lot of what I feel are well written fiction stories, I have traveled to exotic and not so exotic place via my armchair, and I have been having a blast playing a game in development.

Voluntary income inequality reduction

That is something people really need to look into, and that is look into the past and see how long "Voluntary" anything last. Can you say Voluntary military service, how about voluntary income tax? No redistribution removes every and all incentives for a person to want to do anything.

But your post does offer things for people to think about, I just do not really see a problem any more. Either the builders are going to let it die, or it is in danger from the current activities or they would fix/change them if it was.

I could organise 100 pissed-off people to throw in 4 SBD each for something like this

Convert this to having 100 pissed off people giving you 4 full 100% votes, and then when you get to a sufficient level from those 400 full powered votes you would be more able to support the new users.

Ideally, none of what I describe will happen, because it won't be necessary.

I agree that steemit is pretty great, and I've found my short time here to be very intellectually rewarding. But I don't really need the money I could earn from here. So while I might be cranky about what ends up trending, when even the worst of my students could write something more coherent in their sleep, I am never going to be out on the street if my posts don't get enough upvotes.

This is not the case for all steemians, and as more people join, this will be increasingly true. Paying rent so that you are not homeless is not voluntary. Buying food so that you do not starve is not voluntary. Earning money so that you can supply your children with the necessities of life is not voluntary. Does redistribution remove some of the duress and coercion from such 'voluntary' transactions? You're damn right it does!

I know you are OK with voluntary associations that do not redistribute earnings. I would characterise this as a difference of degree, rather than type. Anyway, if the conditions on steemit are favourable enough, then people will not form such associations. But if the reward is too low for the work people put in, such groups are inevitable. That, or people will leave.

You do not see a problem. I respectfully submit that not everyone agrees with this assessment.

You are probably correct about the 100 people and their votes - if they have sufficient SP at least. But, the spectre of less-wealthy people undertaking collective action and not simply doing as they are told does tend to produce a more pronounced reaction in my experience.

Greetings! I am a minnow exclusive bot that gives a 5X upvote! I recommend this amazing guide on how to be a steemit rockstar! I was made by @EarthNation to make Steemit easier and more rewarding for minnows.

Requested by @samueldouglas

I finally found an intelligent being that can coherently write! and your feelings are so similar to mine, as Steemit will never be or have to be my primary income, still I get pissed-off with the system. I also see people post how cryptocurrencies, or the technology behind cryptocurrencies, with Steemit as an example, will lead to world equality or an anarchy that will be better than the society we have now, and I wonder what the hell they based that on. It seems it is based merely on the fact that the technology is a de-central system, but don't they realise that the outcome is still a society with elite and minions, as steemit is an example in small?.
Im looking forward to other post from your hand.
Hefziba

Loading...

If I could have an audience with you at some point, I am in agreement with you on many things, There are solutions, How to fund them is the hard part.
I am here as a dreamer, trying to find the funding for similar project offline.

An audience, lol, I'm not royalty 😃. I will follow your feed and see what you have to say, and you are always welcome to come and find me via the #newbieresteemday Discord Chat channel. I don't have much idea on how to find any of this, but I'm always happy to talk about it.

Thanks for this article. It's quite interesting. Though I think we may disagree on quite a few things, I love that you opened a dialogue that's well thought out and offers some attempt at reconciliation.

As a newbie, just a few short weeks old, I'm slowly beginning to understand the ins and outs of this platform and opportunities. I really doubt my ability to address your points coherently (because not only an I on mobile at work, but also because I generally doubt myself). However I'm going to make attempt at some thoughts and observations.

In my short time here I've seen a helpful and supportive community. What drew me in to steemit was the chance to support content creators directly without sending donations I can't afford to. Sure it's minute, but it's better than nothing. Plus no ads. I also decided I needed to push my own boundries and finally force myself to share my work, gain some feedback, and become a better writer. And hey if I get some money, a following, or even just feedback then that's all added value in my book. Maybe I'm being manipulated but I've only had two post so far and neither of them have gotten more than 15 up votes (and none over $.30), yet I feel better about what I've done here than I have on any other site I've used. Plus I'm so new that I think those results are good. We'll see how it changes!

Of course it's not all sunshine and rainbows.... Apart from walking into a flag war my first day approved. One of my biggest complaints is the tags. As a writer I want to be a apart of the community of creative and fiction writers yet in both the writing and story tags in fighting through things that are not writing or story. Maybe by the most bare definition. But when I see the same guy in both those tags with multiple trending post that are all videos talking about his life or cryptocurrencies I feel a little - I guess disrespected? - I mean what if the roles reversed and creative writers where plaguing the crypto tag with short stories that had nothing to with crypto? Of course I'm not big on call outs or flagging unless it is highly damaging content.

So I really have no expertise on the technical aspects of how it would work, but I had some thoughts on things that might be beneficial or at least cool:

  1. Add a down vote option separate from flagging. The down vote would be separate from stream power to keep whales in check. It would require you to comment and give feedback as to why it was downvoted. And it would decrease your voting power by 5%, then 6%, then 7%, and so on to further prevent spamming. The downvotes wouldn't necessarily mean losing money on a post initially but a small incline in the amount. Maybe the first ten down votes only decrease the payout by $.01, then the next 20 add an addition $.02, and so on again to ensure there are no flagging. AND NO DOWN VOTE BOTS.

  2. Community clubs. It would be interesting to see the tags go deeper into clubs to help ensure the post are very relevant to their tags. This would help save time digging through post to find the exact type of content you are looking for as well as incentivize feedback and helping people become better at what they want. Sure these things exist outside of the platform. But to have it in the platform would be beneficial in my opinion. The downside is turning this into Reddit, which I've had horrible experiences in.

  3. Back to the Flagging. There should be some sort of punishment for incorrectly flagging post. Maybe something like a lockout on post for 24 hours or a 24 hour delay on claiming rewards.

Well I've spent a majority of my morning thinking about this, so you deserve a huge upvote that I cannot give you!

Again thanks for opening a dialogue, and the best of luck to you on this site! I hope to see you around.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.35
TRX 0.12
JST 0.040
BTC 70351.33
ETH 3563.43
USDT 1.00
SBD 4.72