Steemit: A questioning of motives

The general positive atmosphere of Steemit leads to an interesting questioning of motives and their relevance.

Based on observations from reading posts and comments I have noticed that Steemit creates an optimistic mood. While downvotes and flags exist, they exist only to allow users to have a say in how much an individual post can earn. A person that feels an article is gaining a payout larger than they deserve can contribute that opinion. And it is true that criticism can be found, but it is typically meant to construct and not written intentionally to hurt a person. I would bet that most people agree there is a difference between constructive criticism and hateful comments. This is the difference I have found between Steemit and sites like Youtube. This leads to a large question: why?

The theory I have concluded is that the involvement of money is a motive for these positive qualities. Because commenting can make a user money, they are not going to write something disrespectful. I am not saying that all Steemit users or only driven by money, nor am I saying that all comments are insincere. It may be true people on Steemit are just more respectful. The theory I am proposing is just that: a theory.

The presence of money may have on impact of the mood of Steemit. Whether a comment agrees or disagrees with the arguments made in an article, people are more likely to upvote if it is respectful. So the second question is: does it matter?

This is where the conversation leaves Steemit and asks a universal questions about ethics. If ethics are practiced, does it matter why? Is it necessary for ethics to be based purely on morality, or can the motive be something else? Is it wrong to practice good character to accomplish an agenda (making money, for example)?

The truth is, I don’t know whether ethics are a state function. If everyone were to have good character for reasons other than just wanting to be moral human being, the result is still everyone having good character. What is up for discussion is whether or not the force that drives the result matters. If y=x and y=(3 + 2x)/x, it can be said for certain that y=y. What isn’t perfectly clear is that while both x and (3 + 2x)/x bring the same answer, they are completely different ways to get y. Mathematically they are equal, but in reality one method of getting y is not the same as the other. And what I can’t say for sure is whether or not that matters.

Thank you for reading this. I would enjoy hearing other opinions on the topic and whether or not people agree or disagree. If you found this to be an interesting question, please share it, I am interested in other responses. Thank you again!