I agree with that @ronni... "quality content" doesn't necessarily mean "long." A short post, a photo, a clever political cartoon-- these can all add value.

Authentic dialogue on content-- on *different* content-- adds value. Engagement adds value.

Someone relentlessly posting *"nice, please follow me and upvote my latest post"* over and over and OVER again adds nothing (expect for a little "dust" to the blockchain) but DOES have the potential to drive out better content, if allowed to go unaddressed. In a sense... it's almost like a variation on Gresham's Law (bad money replaces good)... in this case, we allow the "lowest common denominator" to dominate.

It only takes 7 days to realize this is not a "get rich quick" community. 😎

It's definitely *not* a get rich quick scheme @kaylinart... although these days we are probably being "saved" in part by the fact that the process of getting from post to cash is lengthy and complicated. These same people who are here for "get rich quick" would be totally draining this place if you could just go straight from rewards to PayPal, for example... they'd be cashing out every time they hit a dollar. Or fifty cents.

I hear you **@bigskykilroy** and I'll add that there are "soap boxish issues" for me, as well.

For me, this all boils down to "short term" vs. "long term" motivations... the approach and strategy to "short term rape" something for all you can... is very *different* from the approach to nurturing and building something for the long term. That applies regardless of whether this is an *"investment forum"* OR *"a community of thinkers and content creators."* 

It boils down to a simple question: *"DO YOU CARE whether this (whatever "this" may be) is still going to be here, in five years from now? And if the answer is YES, are you willing to put the lid on your own desire for short term gains to secure potential LONG term gains?"*

But that's my *personal* perspective... when I look at myself as an investor, I work the same. I don't "day trade" I do extensive research on fundamentals, with intent of getting in on the ground level of an eBay or a Google. I don't *look* for stocks that "might triple in value next month." To me, that's not *investing*, that's *playing the lottery.* But that's just my PERSONAL approach to life.

I used to "rail against the system" and found that it never accomplished anything much more than getting the "haves" to build stronger walls to keep out the "have nots." It doesn't work. As you suggest, nothing changes. So that leaves (to my view) only one other option... go *inside* the system and-- like termites in a wall-- tear down the systems we don't like "from within."

The only bots should be administrative/informative.... like cheetah (plagiarism), twitterbot (information) and so on. 
Bots have zero intelligence, which makes them dumb... but we've been over that before.

Keep doing what you do and you will be a star. :)

@whatamidoing, you raise enough valid points here that I almost want to respond in a separate post... but I'll refrain... for now!

>I honestly cannot envision steemit being much of a healthy community rooted in anything but marketability in the future.

I agree... to a certain extent. Where we get some flexibility is in shaping a "marketable" site that is about *individuals* rather than "corporate" in its approach.

In the earlier days of eBay-- and eBay was already HUGE-- it was this really cool peer-to-peer marketplace where lots of individuals traded all manners of things under the sun. It was brilliant for collectibles, hobbyists, artists, antique dealers, rock hounds and goodness knows what else. Even with 20+ *million* users... there was a sense of "community" there-- forums, user groups and other things. Then "corporate" approaches took over... and the whole "being a cool venue" (and a very profitable one, I might add!) gave way to "maximizing the bottom line at any cost." And it became "just another online mega store" with corporate sellers all but replacing the individuals who largely BUILT the site.

On Steemit, we have a decentralized structure. We get to vote for the witnesses who express support (or objections) to changes and hardforks that represent a consensus of the community. UNlike eBay, we get to have a say in what we want this to become. What's ALSO different here is that we have the "investment" (the Steem token) as potentially separate from the cornerstone app... the Steemit social content platform. So our task-- as Steemit citizens-- is to take the actions and vote for the structural changes that make the platform attractive to investors... but without losing character. BE an "alternative." WalMart doesn't NEED a Steemit account... but maybe a local organic farmer DOES. We can continue to support a structure that values what we value... and that makes it unprofitable (the only language "corporate" understand) for certain elements to set up shop here.

Steemit (and attendant apps) are definitely "a new frontier" in doing things... and the onus is on US-- the users-- to protect that, rather than cave in to the idea that "the only way forward" is by becoming "just like THEM," whoever "them" may be.

Yes, "BE the change." Because I pretty much arrived here with zero faith in ANY "content site with rewards," I had no expectations of getting *squat* from my contributions... and when I *did* get some rewards and saw others getting rewards... I immediately "set up shop" with a long term intent. It doesn't matter what "this post" or "that comment" might earn... what can *I* (and what can *WE*) do today to make sure that there still IS a Steemit, in 3 years, 5 years, 10 years from now. 

So that's what many of my "rants" are about. I am supremely tired of watching "short term greed" kill the proverbial goose that lays golden eggs... as I have witnessed across some 50-odd sites, for two *decades.* Well, with decentralization, at least we have a SAY...

And a great response **@getonthetrain**-- thanks!

I have encountered similar concerns/objections when trying to get friends who are long-time content creators and bloggers to set up a presence here. So, each of the four people I have persuaded to create accounts only did so to comment on *my*content... but never did anything on their own.

Elsewhere, I was recently in discussion over the issue of shitposting and rewards... and I am sure I could make lots of short "how to use Steemit" nuggets and earn $50-100 per each; but I am just not ready to sell my sense of integrity for rewards. So I will continue to post the best I can for the long run... and encourage others to do so, as well... perhaps in the vain hope that it will add up to enough quality content to at least balance out the crap, if not gradually drown it out.

As for popularity... well, this IS a branch of "social media." Which means you pretty much HAVE to shout from the (virtual) rooftops and interact and engage. Even when (as here-- check some of the other comments on this post) many of the *responses* have more real "content" than many *posts* on Steemit.

Thanks @dreemit for your thoughtful reply!

I get it, about "visiting everyone." Even though we both follow far fewer people than follow us... it's at times a daunting endeavor. I'm "in process" of setting up a series of bookmark folders that hopefully will enable me to keep up more readily... that said, publishing my own posts AND writing meaningful comments on 200+ posts a day sounds more like a full-time job than a "pastime" to me. 

I finally... after about five months or so (been here about 6 1/2 months in total) came to define the rewards as "a nice fringe benefit" for publishing blog posts. I've published *thousands* of blog posts in the course of 25-odd years online, most of them without a penny... some earning me a glorious 25 cents in Google Adsense revenue; a tiny handful earning "real" money; my point here being that having any *EXPECTATIONS* of rewards leads to disappointment... and, frankly, means "I'm doing it wrong." 

Sorry, that was my sideways ramble.

Bottom line is that I really *like* the Steemit community, and I like the quality of content and the level of engagement and intelligence I encounter here. *To which end* I find myself invested not in *earning rewards* so much as in the process of helping to ensure there will still be a thriving community *here* for us, next year, and in 2020, and in 2025. *Absolutely,* I enjoy being compensated for writing... but that's a *consequence* of contributing, not a front-loaded *expectation.*

>I have no doubt about what I'd want as an investor. And a sea of shit posts is not it.

And that, right there, sums up why I approach Steemit the way I do. *How do I make this venue attractive to MYSELF, as an investor.*

Pretty simple. And really... quite selfish, too. In a way...

Appreciate the inclusion @shadowspub... always an honor to be part of the "Steemit Ramble."

P.S.: Glad to see you're still doing that!

*"Value:"* **@enjar**'s epic comments.
*"Rewards:"* Very subjective... in this case, appreciation for your thoughts, and a stout upvote.

OK, so that's the quick and flip answer.

Both value and rewards strike me as pretty individual things. As you suggested, at best we can determine what those terms mean, *to us.*

Outside that, however, I'd like to think it would be a common thread for people *to want Steemit to survive in the long run.* Whether you are here for "a quick buck" or to gain from long term appreciation of the Steem you hold... it seems that the common thread *most* us would hold is that we'd still like to be DOING "this" in the future. I doubt there's anyone out there, "doing their thing," thinking "*I hope this all goes away tomorrow!*"

So-- with that as a common starting point... how do we each-- in our own way-- contribute to a common desire for there to still be a Steemit in 2025?

In a sense, that's a large part of what this post was inviting everyone to do.

Thanks