it's mostly a snakepit of petty politicking, pseudo intellectual mental masturbation and dictatorial sub-redditors with huge egos.
Some mega whales advocates for flagging content they don't like that gets too popular and rewarded too much to their liking. They want to be the dictators of who can or can't keep their rewards just because they don't like the content getting popular, or don't like the person, etc.
Jumping into decentralized social interaction without a plan makes for an omnidirectional mess hehe. If Steemit Inc had set something to being with, at least there would be a set goal to work with for starters. We can't seem to even start one lol.
Yeah well... it's really hard for many people to rise above their own shit long enough to realize that if the want their own shit to float, they need to (somewhat selflessly) take care of the "pond" that makes it possible for their shit to float, in the first place. But that somehow seems to be rocket science...
I've long been wailing at the moon about the weakness (or "Achilles Heel") of decentralization (a good idea, in principle) being "fragmentation." Or, as you put it rather well "an omnidirectional mess." Maybe it makes me a heinous traitor to the cause to say so, but not all aspects of centralized structures are inherently "evil."
The thing is on the blockchain, you cant have centralized power, it violates the whole trustless tech aspect. I had the idea of splitting into two ledgers, one as a real ledger for financial transactions, and the other chain for data/info. I have lots of ideas on how things would be better, making another blockchain, possible even a deployable package for people to tokenize their own sites and run it like that.