Steemit, although a unique experiment in social media, tends to suffer similar problems that other leading platforms have faced, namely, where there are material gains to realized, human nature being what it is, people will have a tendency to game the system. This may include, for example, chasing Whales for upvotes, establishing multiple accounts for the purpose of upvoting one's own content or deploying bots to entice of members to upvote content with the promise of an upvote in kind. Ideally, content should receive upvotes based upon its merits and commensurate to the quality thereof. I do realize that 'quality' can be a subjective concept. However, I do believe that most people can make distinction between a post that required some genuine effort on he author's part and a junk post or worst, spam.
I think Steemit's developers and leadership could give take a closer look at how to incentivise members to engage in each others content and to build robust discussions and dialogue. In other words, devise a system that goes beyond pure upvotes and delegated Steem power. Offer financial incentives and other perks based on the amount of constructive interactions members maintain within the community.
Some people will come to Steemit just to make money, others, to gather a large following. But some people just wish to share their interests and talents with the community and receive constructive feedback and make connections to other with similar interests.
I believe the people behind Steemit are a pretty smart and dedicated bunch. And, although it may appear daunting in get one's posts responded to in a meaningful manner, or seen at all, I remain hopeful that this talent group will find ways to overcome these and other challenges. Because it would truly be a shame to see this platform not reach its true potential.