I must clarify that given the format of the Blockchain-based social networks, I believe, have communities as a way to "classify" posts.

Or at least that was the intention. Now I see that a community title can have themes different from what one would expect to find.

That's why I believe that now, or perhaps always, communities have been a kind of tacit alliance, where votes are exchanged for votes cast. Perhaps I'm wrong.

I personally write in communities where there is freedom and support, not only in votes, but also in advice, and where there are topics that interest me.

When I created my Steem account, I sought support from the Latin American community because of the language barrier. I received penalties when I wasn't ignored.

That's why I believe community moderators hold the key to a community's success or failure. Some lack maturity and misuse their role, which alienates members.

Although communities have their flaws, personal blogs would have a bigger flaw: only truly interesting authors would get voluntary visits, the rest would get lost in a sea of posts.

Finally, I believe that the corruption you mention has caused serious people to view Steem, Hive, or Blurt with skepticism, because there is no fair retribution.