RE: To Power Up or not to Power Up, that is the question
A refreshing and calm perspective, for the change :)
I assume very strongly that everyone who invests money here has this money left to lose. In such a highly speculative environment, anything else would be stupid or desperate. Depending on where the money that flows into this crypto form comes from, you can consider it angry or happily earned. Unfortunately, people have a rather unhappy and tense relationship to money.
I would only recommend people to invest in Steemit or to start here as bloggers if they have strong nerves, a smooth and quickly regenerating mind and a lot of humour. For everyone else, this platform is more like a psychological flytrap, a hornet's nest, where the fear of the pool being raped and the dream of great wealth being over goes around. The big ones infect the small accounts with this fear or FOMO. I include myself.
As a blogger I would like to have my peace from the noise before and after each hardfork and the space invaders who dominate the trends with economic and technical topics. If the goal is to have a trend world dominated by quantities, I can understand when artists, poets, fiction writers, philosophers, etc., seek the distance to avoid unintentionally serving the cool or hot player mentalities that promote and bet on "user behavior".
In the wiki explanation of game theory that I understand, Steemit is a non-cooperative environment:
If the players can conclude binding contracts, this is called cooperative game theory. If, on the other hand, all behaviours (including possible cooperation between players) are self-enforcing, i.e. they result from the self-interest of the players without binding contracts being concluded, this is referred to as non-cooperative game theory.
In this respect, I would say, it testifies to collective intelligence to say goodbye. My impression of Steemit is that content needs to be there only for content in order to offer a kind of carnal substance without which investment makes little sense.
Would you have invested if there wasn't a blogosphere that exists as an expression of something lively? What would you have invested in then? Would there even be a Steemit?
I am actually not interested in making money here as I do not depend on it. I'd say from the cool gamers perspective I'd be the best candidate in terms of a naive user who does not care for the cake. Over time I felt the burden to always use the upvote-button and would prefer to just talk to other people not thinking about rewarding them. So I just switched to giving always 100 percent, no matter what. From my logic, an article which I read from beginning to end deserves my full treat even though I highly disliked the content. I realized that I begin to detest that and that was the moment for me to reconsider, as I am not wanting to be a punisher for opinions or "bad quality".
Even worse, now this whole downvote issue came around the corner. So, after two years of experience I feel exhausted and am ready to retreat.
Thanks @erh.germany for your very well thought out response. I think there are several different perspectives in regards to rewards on Steem. Some may see it as a zero sum game, where we are all fighting over a finite rewards pool. For these people, it is more about competition and taking what you can. There could be some cooperation in vote trading but little beyond that.
There are another group that see the Steem rewards pool as a mechanism to grow the entire ecosystem. They believe the rewards should be distributed to the biggest contributors to this growth. The people with this mentality will be more focused on cooperation than competition.
Thanks for replying. My questions above ... I am indeed curious about your answer.
What do you mean by "entire ecosystem"? Do you talk about outside Steemit? If so, it's not only an eco-system it's many systems and sub-systems all related to each other. Which group or groups are you referring to? How do you define "biggest contributors", is it financially or otherwise?
Do we agree on the notion that "economic growth" actually needs to be reduced or transformed as well as slowed down? I see no other way if we humans want to stay healthy and mentally stable and cooperate on a global scale. I'd say there is so much money floating around already. This expands and accelerates developments and projects which actually need long term views and schedules as well. I may talk to the wrong person, I don't want to offend you. I hope you can follow my concerns.
I wonder what the big guys indeed do with financial powers. .... Would like to see local and international as global interdisciplinary projects without having to rush for results, keeping it sensitive and sensible.