You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: A declaration of principles at 200 posts.
These are all focused on the internal workings, which I understand is the goal of this document.
Do you also think there should be principles regarding Steem and Steemit as they relate to the external world?
Hm. Do you have a more specific question than that? I'm not really sure what you're getting at.
I've thought for a while that we need more writing about Steem toward unsophisticated audiences - that's a large part of what @forinvestors was about - but I'm now kind of skeptical about whether we're really too early for that and need to work some of the process bugs out first.
Yes, @forinvestors is part of it.
From my perspective, the value of something, such as a coin, is determined by its use in a global context. I mean, SteemIt was seeded as a blog site, but it is growing out of this. In growing, it will possibly increase in value. The SMT feature looks promising, but we still see the birth of new narrowly focused coins, such as smoke.io. SMT are not the single future of Steem.
What do you think sould be the principles and values that guide Steem and SteemIt's interactions with the external world and will these principles be profitable for thise of us contributing content at this point?
This is really only tangentially responsive, because each half of that question really requires a week of thought and a post, and at the end of it I'm not sure my vision for what Steem should be would end up being acceptable to others.
(For one thing, I really like the blogging platform. It has key features other than monetization that I really want and aren't currently offered on any top/growing platform, which is not something I can say about any of the other applications except maybe Steem Monsters.)
But what I'm thinking is that we have had "beta" up there in the top left corner for a long time, and it's not very accurate. As we talk about HF20, we're not really talking about product problems, we're talking about process problems, which are much more appropriate for an alpha or even a pre-alpha.
At the same time we have some philosophical conflict about what we're building. Is Steem a social media network itself? Is it the underpinnings of a new internet which contains social media networks and also other things? Can we somehow manage to build both of those things at the same time? Does @vandeberg have a brilliant design for that which he's just not communicating well?
So I think where I am on external relations is that Steem really is still in the lab and we're not remotely ready to write a paper about it yet. We could recruit some additional test subjects, and it would be good if we got our consent standards for that above the median. But we still have serious doubts about getting positive results to our study at all, so leaking it to the media isn't a good idea.
Maybe I've taken this analogy a little too far.