A question we might be missing here: should we make a community effort to retain ALL Steemers?
We are looking at a matrix with 2 scales:
1- Quality content -> poor content
2- Interesting to most people -> small niche
(There is a third scale of popular producer to non popular producer, but we are really looking at non popular Steemers for this discussion)
Someone that puts out quality content that interests most people should eventually rise to the top.
Someone that puts out bad quality on material that IS interesting to most Steemers MIGHT rise up.
Someone that puts out quality content that nobody really cares about will not rise up
Someone that puts out boring and poor work will not rise up.
Should all these folks be retained? Or should the same effort be spent in attempting to retain them?
FWIW, I put myself in the third category, as I think my work is quality ( don't we all? ;>), but that I understand doesn't appeal to most folks. Should the same effort be spent to retain me as someone whose work contributes more to Steemit?
I hate to say this, but no. From what I've seen @curie and @robinhoodwhale do a good job of curating and bringing attention to new Steemers whose work should be given a look; those Steemers who I would classify in my first group. So the effort we have at the moment is definitely targeted at the right group.
But does Steemit as a community want to or need to retain the other three categories?
I don't know. The time and resources of the community are finite. Since so many Steemers are voluntarists, those who want to retain everyone will certainly work at that.
Thanks for a well-written piece.
I definitely get your points here.
In my view I want to retain the 'good' users who have a drive already behind them to become better at what they do AND how they can present it. Sure there are going to be certain topics that are so pigeon-holed that it's going to be hard to get a whole lot of attention without having a pre-existing following (which can be built.) However, every person has a myriad of topics they also care about. I don't expect people to be phenominal writers when starting here, especially after the decades of facebook, text lingo, etc. But they can be taught and trained.
Imo everyone has something of value to bring to the table. With help someone that is having a hard time here can find ways to personally connect through a post. Most people sell themselves short, with support and discussion, great stories have come from very unlikely users.
So to answer your question on who should be actively retained...
I want to retain the users to are working hard and making progress, regardless of how slow that may be. I want to keep those willing to put forth the effort simply to improve. I really can't ask for much else.
On the flip, I am happy to see go those users looking for a quick buck, trying solely to maximize $/hr, those that bitch and moan after their first post, while having no followers, while putting in no marketing, made them no money. I'm not out to help retain those who are driven by their sense of entitlement versus passion.
Ty for the great response!
everyone has something of value to bring to the table
ah, but there is a difference between market value and intrinsic value ;> joking aside, I do see your point.
and what do we mean by quality? for me, that means well researched and organized, not necessarily with perfect grammar and spelling (which also happen to be my own weak points).
the compliment to everyone has something of value to bring to the table is that everyone has different tastes that those bringing the value satisfy. What is boring to me is interesting to someone else, and vice versa.
so now I understand the value of of retaining those Steemers who aren't making a pain in the ass of themselves.