Decentralisation with bot-scented friction

I'm running out of creative juices again, so I guess it's time to write about Steemit - not because it's inspiring, but because it's always something.

Of course, that “something” depends on the mood of the day.

Some days, it’s a roller coaster. Other days, it’s Lake Placid. Most days, it’s just opening the browser, upvoting two or three posts or maybe commenting here a little, there a little, then closing it again. What usually follows is a kind of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind...

In theory, Steemit is a decentralised paradise where neither editors nor cigar-puffing bosses decide what’s valuable. Every Steemian gets a say - rich or poor. (Naturally, the rich are heard more. A lot more.) In practice? It’s like slaving over a five-star recipe, only to pull a smoking pan of burnt tokens from the oven, while the whole kitchen reeks of bot sweat and broken promises. So you sigh, ditch the culinary utopia, and grill up a cheeseburger instead. Unhealthy, sure - but at least it’s free of artificial promises. Just your own pure, unfiltered, grease-dripping mediocrity. And somehow, it tastes better.

Okay, let’s pretend that was deep. Moving on…

“That government is best which governs least.”

Like Thoreau’s ideal government, Steemit aims to govern least - no central authority, no editorial overlords, just users rewarding each other freely. Thoreau imagined a world where people followed their own moral compasses, with minimal interference from the powers that be. But that only works if people act with integrity. On Steemit, as in life, most are driven more by self-interest than principle. And let’s be honest: once profit enters the picture, expecting people to stay principled is…well a bit naïve.

Unfortunately, too little structure doesn’t guarantee freedom; more often, you get an infestation of bot-chats, centralised voting, and a leaderboard that feels like a popularity contest dominated by whoever can lick the most boots without choking.

"All machines have their friction; and possibly this does enough good to counter-balance the evil."

Exactly the point. Every system, whatever that may be (political, social, mechanical) has its flaws. And Steemit is no exception. Sure, it stinks. But those flaws reveal weak points which bring about truths that often spark reform. Without those mishaps, we wouldn’t see what needs fixing. We wouldn’t innovate. I think it’s clear by now: innovation depends on failure.

But then Thoreau continues:

“But when the friction comes to have its machine, and oppression and robbery are organized, I say, let us not have such a machine any longer.”

Now, we don’t really need to go that far. Yes, a system needs structure not to control everything, but to hold things together. To prevent the friction from "becoming" the system. We don’t need to tear the whole thing down. But we can’t rely on people to act morally all the time either.

The lack of central authority might sound utopian, but without constant, deliberate effort to maintain order - things fall apart. Decentralisation doesn’t mean 'no governance at all'. It means no rulers - just rules we all agree on and tools that actually work.

And if it fails? Cheeseburgers. Always cheeseburgers. 🍔

^{Important note:
You probably shouldn't take this too seriously. This feels like a complete representation of someone who has nothing to write about (because there's nothing else). Hence, the cheeseburger. 😉}