Steemit is a curious experiment. I find it very interesting from various angles, but the one that gets my head scratching almost immediately after joining is a genuine and honest question to what quality can the content on a social network devoted to written articles raise when the motivation behind some, if not a significant proportion of the users, is something else than enthusiasm for the topic in question and the love of writing.
While in short term the platform might work, its a real question whether it can thrive without encouragement for quality and serious content in the long run. And as each person has their own idea of quality, and none of them being superior over the others, we quickly come to a question of necessity of the guidelines for raising the content quality or maybe even editors, which is really quite opposite of what decentralization is all about.
Really curious thing. At a quick glance it's quickly obvious in what state the content currently is, even the top upvoted posts - and such state surely can't be in the interest of the platform, can it?
Any thoughts on the topic?
