I can understand your frustrations - certain people have earned disproportionately on the platform. Others have been unfairly unrewarded.
However, if you look at the people who've earned the most, they've contributed the most. They've brought across big audiences (=thousands of new signups). They're also very influential (those who were big in the early days of Bitcoin, can be very influential at bringing others here). Or they've coded the platform. Or they've created tools / new advertising / new marketing for Steemit. Certain writers earn a lot because they have produced high quality content with mass appeal (easy to read + lots of pictures + interesting stories). Other writers like @stellabelle have been very prolific in their writing and outreach to the community here. So all in all - the majority of those whales have earned their place and power. There are a few exceptions of course but there'll always be flaws in the system.
If you want to join them, think about what you can offer that can
- Expand the Steem ecosystem of apps etc.
- Market & gain new users
- Research something that is groundbreaking
- Give advice for something that people need here on Steemit
- Doing interviews with influential people
- Sharing something you're super passionate about.
Just a few thoughts...
Thanks for the thoughts!
Disproportionate earnings is actually not a big frustration of mine. I think for the most part people are being rewarded fairly and while there are some minnows that get overlooked, I think this will change over time.
The more concerning thing to me is when changes are made without full transparency (e.g. the payout being changed from 24 hrs to 12 hrs back to 24 hrs). There needs to be more transparency for all users when it comes to changes made in the protocol.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit