You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Exploratory Analysis shows DApps activity is gaining market share on Steemit.com
For a platform which have so many peculiarities to understand and a waiting time for account creation of 2 weeks and huge difficult for a normal people to understand how to use, the base of users that we have is kind huge.
We cannot compare Steem with a Facebook platform, since the characteristics of people who use both platforms is really different.
Are you pointing to anything that is beyond our control ?
Facebook is an extremely complex platform, they have very sophisticated algorithms to choose what to show to whom at what moment and what ads to display and what clicks and likes to collect and how to organize them and what to infer from them.
Yet the Zuck has deftly manage to hide the complexity from the users. Is there any objective reason why we couldn't have done the same ? Why haven't we focused on creating a user experience that is so smooth that normal people would not care about understanding the inner workings?
Account creation is slow ... why ? Is this something outside our control ? Are we depending on someone else ? No, this was a management decision to make account creation slow and painful. It was as though we were reluctant to accept users.
So no, considering that we did it all to ourselves, there is no excuse.
And we should compare Steem with Facebook because if today the characteristics of people who use both platforms is really different it is all our fault !
We have prevented normal people from joining (with the pointless 3 week account creation time) to a point where only nerds and crypto die-hards could stay on this platform.
The consequence of our decisions is that we are completely dependent on the fickleness of crypto prices ! If you play with fire, you are going to get burned !
Actually, I'm pointing to something that's exactly in our control, but I'm not comparing apples to bananas.
Facebook has a complex structure behind it, but the principle of it was not to bring people showing that they could make money from it. When you use Facebook to make money, you have the same problem that we have in Steemit. In this case we come up with a very interesting question, how many people are on Facebook to make money? Analyzing this process, we can use the two groups of people on the same level, those who are on Facebook in search of money and those who are on Steemit for the same reason.
Now if we compare both sites, compare yes to the first two years, when Facebook had less than 10 million users for a system that I speak again, was not ideal as the financial return, as is explained here in Steemit.
Account creation is slow because you need to pay to have an account. If you want an account for free, you have to wait. In this case I ask, when did Facebook ask you for money to create an account? Is the business model wrong? I think not, if we did not have a great time to create a new account, we would have several fake accounts, and unlike Facebook, we can not ban them as this is not possible in Steemit and also goes against your goal Is not it?
Finally, Steem really failed ... Failed for lack of documentation showing how easy it was for you to access a platform with no ideological question that will erase your account because it simply goes against what your CEOs think. Now, why does not this exist? Blame the whales and the creator of the platform, or blame us as users that we show Steem as a way to post and earn money instead of showing that here we have a much greater amount of freedom?
If someone failed, it was not the others, they were ourselves, too. We have a great deal of guilt.
"Who is to blame" is not the point, obviously :-)
The idea is to seek together better ways forward, identify what was done wrong and agree on how to do it right going forward.
For me having to pay or to wait to have an account is an idiotic idea. If you position the platform as "uncensorable expression of opinions" AND you create free accounts fast AND you dangle the prospective of earning money for expressing your opinions then you are open to abusers ...
Fair enough, how do you solve this while keeping all the above parameters fixed:
Is this solvable ? Can you add something to the system that keeps the three features above while protecting the system from spam and abusive behaviour ?
That is the problem that needs solving IMO
In that I agree.
I believe that currently the biggest problem is paying for account creations, this really is an obstacle for new entrants. It turns out that the need to pay the new accounts is in theory an attempt to stop the abuse of multiple accounts.
I agree that it should be paid, but we have to check how we can do to create new accounts and the cost to stay with us. Say, a fund where we put a certain amount of STEEM and get back financial returns in the next 365 days that would give the value of the account. In other words, we would finance the new accounts at the expense of daily returns for a year without profit or loss.
I think this would be the most sensible model.
Getting now from the P.A.L. discord server.@lukestokes