Posters post not what they want to say, but what they think an average steemer might like to hear. Curators upvote not what they like, but what they think an average steemer might like. So what are those top stories? Are they good for real people, or just for an abstract fantasy "an average steemer", which might even not exist?
That's an excellent question. I'm asking it myself too. I guess we'll see in the future as more people enter Steemit. Maybe it will diversify and expand the content and people will start looking on Steemit more to post content they are passionate about or get and upvote for information really useful for them and less for speculating on what will become a buzz. At least I hope so !
I'm less optimistic about this, my experience that quality can be created only in small communities, the more people involved the more averaging to mediocrity.
Yes this is an interesting problem. Overall the Steem project/experiment sounds good. But so far I see many of the top posts are about Steem in general, which might be expected since it's still so new of a concept and in general. I think it would be beneficial if they could somehow factor in how much traffic or likes a post generates from outside sources and other social networks. If they could factor this in to the monetary payout incentive, that might help?