I should probably go through it again. I've gone through a lot of material so I don't know what came from where.
We're kind of off topic on someone else's post, but I will say there are plenty of things that could be shored up on Steemit, and throughout the STEEM ecosystem, if the intent is to actually move forward with what exists. With SMTs coming, I don't know what that means to Steemit as a platform. If Hivemind/Communities come and blows everyone away, then maybe Steemit gets pushed to the fore.
The problem is, we as users don't know. And maybe some of it we don't need to know. I'd just rather post, comment and curate and have the rest of the inner workings be handled. There seems to be competing interests at work here, and I don't know how it gets untangled. I just believe it needs to be sorted out, and I have hope that it will.
Just my 2 cents, this is part of the radical decentralization that blockchain does best.
Steemit should focus on SMTs, onboarding, and HF 20; there have been 19 hard forks so far (with some big changes in a couple of them) and so you have old posts that are no longer relevant showing up on Google searches that mis-explain curation.
I think the community can work on some solutions here...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
So, what would you suggest as something the community can work on? Like offering training on the ends and outs of curation? Or is there something else? We're kind of limited to how we get the information out to posting, which can get lost. Not everyone who might want to see it will.
In my mind, the curation situation is code. It's set up that way. I'd rather it be less complicated. You vote when you vote and you receive some compensation for it, unless you're dust voting, which you'd need to be aware of.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit