RE: A response to the perpetual question on Steem to curators: what is 'Good content'
You offer an unagitated and clear view of things. I find myself in many things and cannot and will not contradict you. A view that I would like to offer: It is obviously difficult for people to distinguish between what is actually the case and what is offered at SteemSTEM and what happens in the chats, where the team faces the questions of the users and where much is discussed. From my point of view, the impression of an elitist group has arisen because it happens that the moderation speaks from a certain height with chat visitors which strike condescending to very rude.
If everyone were quite insensitive and calm, the conversations on discord would be perceived differently. But every interest group that wants to achieve something needs moderators who have experience in managing an editorial office. If even the slightest impression of dishonesty, favouritism and discrimination emerges, you are dealing with a reputation-damaging debate.
Personally, I removed myself from the discord chat because I noticed that I started to react emotionally when I found that one of the moderators leaned a little too far out of the window. Basically, I am informed enough to know what criteria a Steemstem article needs to follow.
From my point of view this is still in the experimental phase with mistakes between both sides: the Steemstem headquarters and the interested parties coming into contact. A reputation grows over a long period of time. Steemit as a platform for the communities that have formed themselves as a central place are still too young for that. We all could take that as a learning experience though.
Sometimes I get the impression that one produces content for the sake of content, but somehow has forgotten what one actually wanted. The miserable research possibilities on Steemit are a real nuisance. And the seven-day windows let old content rot in the basement. Nobody cares what you posted a year ago. I don't know if one wants to meet this circumstance at all. You might think you could start by referring to Steemit content, for example because you're writing a science article and referring to other steem-stemlers. Personally, I would lose myself in the tedious research and therefore prefer to resort to the large Internet, where I can offer PDF papers in full length and quality as a source.
Other than that, you make some really good points and I am in favor of the way you express them.
You are likely referring to Alexs1320 or whatever, who was consistently 12 times ruder than anyone else and is no longer a part of the team. He was hyper-aggressive constantly, in and out of steemstem. Oh JTM had some issues too, that he was open about dealing with, but he has also since left. That being said I can't think of anyone else who was rude to anyone, unless it was me, which I find pretty unlikely? Either way, I haven't seen any rude or aggressive behaviors in weeks or months
The 7 day thing has always been a point of contention and I for one have, for the longest time, had deep issues with the very fundamental concept of how steem works. However, this has led my brain to come up with my scholarship scheme which I think works in a very complementary way, just not the way we're used to.
People are and will always find a solution, and steempress, for example, demonstrates another angle. We just gotta wait it out.
A final point about the elitism bit, whoever you're referring to, they are presumably human as we all are, and humans tend to succumb to psychological deficits, shame of being wrong, fear of change, confirmation bias and so forth. But the human personality is not part of what steem stem, or curie, or OCD, are.
No, I don't even know the people you mentioned. I tried to give an explanation why one might have got the impression of "elitist", nothing more. Whether you seem rude or arrogant to someone is not in your hands. The perception of people is very different. My perception when observing interactions in the chat came to the edge where I found communication difficult and so I kept it wise to take the focus away from there and silently decide for myself whether to support the STEM community. I have delegated a share. Which I equate with the fact that, by and large, I trust the concept, but I wasn't always completely satisfied with the way it was led or communicated. These are two different pairs of shoes.
We could now argue whether my impression was not justified and you want to dismiss any form of misconduct other than those you mentioned. I had emphasized that people become extremely critical when they see even a hint of improper leadership. Personally, I have not clashed with anyone, you or anyone else.
No? I'd say it is always a part.
Yes, the fundamental concept also always gave me headaches. Do you have some more information about your scholarship scheme? Sounds interesting.
Steempress I never have dealt with.
Waiting it out is always a good idea. :)
You don't know jtm? justtryme90?
I'm not the 'extremely critical' or 'dismissive' type don't worry. If you have something to say about the way we're run that you think can improve of course i'd like to hear it. As I said in this post, we rarely get that, at least anymore.
I vote that you join again, a lot of things are changing, and its not exactly very active these days like the rest of Steem so, low stress environment and we all value your presence & content.
But I get your larger point and though i certainly recall a time when things could have been seen as elitist, on the basis that i refer to in this article, I don't see it. The way people behave? maybe yeah. Things to do to enjoy votes? Nahhhh.
Ok regarding scholarship thing I can send a text wall in a DM if you like, i dont want the idea blockchained and public just yet cause its too good to be stolen by less trustworthy folk!
HaHa, LOL, of course, I know JTM but was not sure about the short cut of his name :)
Yes, I think work improvement is always a possibility. I decided to let it run and watch from a distance to get a clear mind. Also, from a systemic point of view I observe a system and try to decide whether the leading figures do maintain, for example, an autoritative or democratic style and whether they bring enough experience with them in having led a team. I decided that not all were experienced but can learn in trying to and becoming more advanced during time.
After I put my own nose into becoming a team member, I felt that they style was not for me and I dropped out again. I felt having no mandate in explaining you guys what I was after and already communicated within my steemstem posts.
Putting some distance between myself and my STEM articles was needed. I knew I was giving a lot into the sphere and I ran out of topics. I said it - so far - all in that particular field. "Systemics", "Systems Theory" and all related themes are a special interest of mine. Also very much work related.
Maybe now it's time for another article as I notice that "systemic consensus" could become a hot topic. It's an idea which is ahead of it's time and as always, not recognized as such :)
I guess I gave you a longer background than you have asked for :)
Yes, I will go to discord and DM you. I understand why you don't want to spoil it.
Hopefully you've gotten some inspiration, see you there!