Yes, a good question. As you might guess from the article I have mixed feelings about it: I think the underlying principle of Steemit has a lot of potential for funding good writing in future, but I also have concerns about the current implementation of the system, particularly the steep slope of the reward curve, which usually gives a winner-take-all payout distribution; personally I'd favour a wider spread of payouts, with top writers earning less and writers in the middle earning more.
Most of my colleagues share this opinion: no-one goes into journalism hoping to make a lot of money, so we're not usually expecting big payouts for our work; but it's important that a steady minimum level of payment is guaranteed.
Ah good point the minimum wage is 0, I do believe that some may get lucky but as you can see your writing shines through. I feel that if a large media company was to get behind steemit, journalist could be paid through steemit dollars from the company and steemit. Also the company could influence with steemit power for a boost to the trendy spot.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit