Well, there's some of each, I think. And Steemit may be the best way we've found to curate and reward content on the web (at least it pays better than Facebook or Twitter), but it's not perfect. A whale will rise to the top because minnows circle around hoping for a generous return vote. But that's probably inevitable with a system where some people invest with cash and others work to generate content. It's not so different from the recent scandal about the Handbook for Mortals book getting gamed to the New York Times bestseller list because the author's pals ordered a ton of copies from key stores.

Is it unfair that those whales get to rake in lots of votes for minimal content? Maybe. But on the other hand their investment in the system is part of what creates a perception of value around the STEEM tokens, and I don't begrudge anyone a return on their investment.

Is there a conflict of interest? Maybe. A motivation to produce lots of poor articles quickly? Sure. Will we still be drawn to the writers to engage, inform, and entertain us? Definitely.