One of the arguments that people have when explaining why cleaning up the environment is nonviable is, the cost to the economy. I have always fund this argument quite invalid as an economy is indifferent to what the value is spent on, all it requires is it to be spent on something. What does get affected through a shift in economic flow is, what is currently taking the value, however in order to change one area, sometimes it requires destroying another.
Lately on Steem there has been a strong push to change the flow of the inflation pool so that rather than work against the community, it can work for it - or at least - hopefully for it. While there is a long way to go, the redirection seems to be having an effect on the community in more ways than the direction, with vote behavior shifting and content that is at least considered somewhat valuable getting more stake attention.
This has come through various shifts in account behavior with the largest driver of change being the downvoting pool that has discouraged vote stacking from the bots and the largest of buyers and as a result, the spare VP has been spread without buys.
Also, with the downvoting normalizing and it not costing upvoting power, the retaliatory downvoting is quite easy to counter, making those who have previously been voting in a circle, easy targets. It really would be better for them to just curate or delegate to a curation initiative that helps Steem and, will return the curation percentage to them.
This shift in the economy of Steem has obviously "hurt" some people more than others when it comes to Steem earnings, as it has shifted the flow from one industry to another. OldSteem to #Newsteem. Every change in technology will draw attention away from what it replaces and on steem this is no different.
The change from the incentive to maximize at any cost even if it pollutes the waters, to take a cut but provide 50% to improving the waters is something that will hopefully eventually lead to not only an increase in price, but an improvement in the experience and their for the attraction of Steem for the outside world. While some people seem to think that this place will never work and they are entitled to their opinion, I believe that once the norm is that users of Steem also take responsibility for it, things will change.
Many of the users who are negative on Steem are also the ones who haven't invested themselves into being part of the solution to improve it, instead they go out of their way to degrade it, pollute it and drive users away. Perhaps this is a good thing, because if someone is driven away by FUD without actually investigating what is going on, they are unlikely the ones to take responsibility and instead rely on others for their well-being.
I can't imagine any successful entrepreneur giving into FUD, but I do see that they might be the ones to give into FOMO as they look to make gains. What I have found is that those who are generally negative about the world are also the ones who are the least proactive in trying to improve it which is logical because, what's the point if it all collapses?
I find the position precarious of course because often these same people are the most outspoken on why no one else should be making a push to improve things also. What the FUD spreaders are trying to do is create the conditions that support their position and create a self-fulfilling prophecy so they can say "I was right". Of course this works in the opposite direction too and those who are driving toward a better future require getting people to join the movement upward.
In my opinion, no matter how much money there is to be made, I am not going to invest myself into a winning position that wins by blatant pollution and on Steem, I am of the same mind. I would much rather support a positive position that has the chance to improve the ecosystem than a position that obviously leads to failure.
What I find interesting is that the people here who believe that things can't or won't change and Steem is destined to failure are also the ones who benefit from some of the most enormous social changes the world has ever seen when it comes to things like freedom to vote, mobility, economic opportunity, education and a host of other aspects that not too long ago, might have crushed them.
The thing that many tend not to recognize is that the living standards they enjoy in this world are due to people who rather than be negative and say it can't change, invested themselves and changed it.
Change at large scale comes through many individuals collaborating to enact the change and in a world that is more interconnected and available than it has ever been through technological innovation, global change is now possible. And for the first time in history, there is the potential for the end of the chain, the consumer, to drive the change from the bottom up.
While the strength and power of the corporations and their government lackeys is their wealth, it is also their weakness as their reliance on us purchasing to making money means that they are at the mercy of us shifting the direction of the flow. Supply will always chase demand and as demand changes direction, so to will the focus of supply.
We can see how quickly a micro economy like Steem can shift as the hardfork EIP brought movement in behavior for the better within days and while it would take longer, a change in global economics only requires a similar shift. Any organization in the world no matter how wealthy can be destroyed by changing demand processes so whatever it offers, is no longer wanted and I think that the convergence of various global factors is moving in a direction where we are able to wake up, realize this and then, demand different.
When it comes to movements, while most people will say how they support it after the fact, the fact is that most people won't take part before the fact. Where were you when the change happened?
Probably at home scared of change.
[ a Steem original ]