The resolutions I wrote about are really personal. And I'm not here since such a long time, so I still have a lot to learn about different opinions here on Steem (and about Steem). But for the sake of opposing something to your arguments, I will develop my point of view (on resolution 3 as it is the one you criticize).
First of all, let it be known that I partly agree with you.
Just because people have the ability to create content doesn't mean their work is worth being rewarded.
That's why I proposed that Steemit Inc. delegates Steem Power to already existing communities or new moderating accounts. So they can give the 15 SP in votes instead of a fixed delegation to users who are worth it. And moreover, it could not be considered as censure because anybody would still be able to spam / sh*t post and get upvotes from other accounts.
For me, delegating systematically 15 SP to every new account is rewarding people that aren't, in majority, worthy of it. And it encourages circle voting and other schemes. From the Steemit Inc.'s point of view, it is less "blocked" currency, and that liberated Steem Power could be used in much more efficient ways (in terms of retention and distribution) by delegating it to existing communities' accounts or new accounts made for specific tasks.
And while user retention seems like an important thing, the reality is that many users should not be here because steemit does not improve the lives of most people, not yet atleast.
That could be said of any social network.
Does Facebook improve the life of anyone ? Instagram ? Twitter ? But if you want to measure up to this type of competition, user retention is really important. More people using Steemit, more people buying STEEM, the higher value it has. So user retention should be the priority for investors, and for Steemit Inc. as their role should be to maximize the returns of investors, and to maximize the value of STEEM in the long term.
Thanks for the well thought out reply. I believe there is a specific need for 15sp delegation because an account with zero money in it cannot perform any action on steemit.
I also think that providing SP to communities, while it was a good idea in concept, doesn't serve the purpose since the community needs outreach (most often only perform that within the Steemit environment rather than outside).
As far as improving lives, the other services have actually improved lives. Facebook is one of the most useful apps for communities and groups to find each other and to communicate. Instagram and Twitter have grown to become ways for people to also connect and share experiences all because of centralized ways of pushing content to users based on their commonly viewed interest. Both Twitter and Instagram use an influencer model and have become marketing tools.
Steemit can become that and more, but right now, people don't come here for anything than to make a buck from posting random stuff. And the content quality is so poor due to the crowd it attracts, that it makes the website look like a joke.
But I don't think any of that matters because the potential for the platform to grow is there. The tools to support third party growth is largely there and being developed further. Steemit will always be a condenser that shows everything on the blockchain from any user. Thats its purpose. We need to build our own communities.
For the 15 SP delegation, of course you can not set it to 0 as it's the Steem Power that gives you the bandwidth necessary to perform actions as you said. But 15 can be reduced, and multiplied by 900 000 accounts that has it, that begins to amount to something, even if you just reduce it by 5.
For the communities not reaching outside of the Steemit environment, that's totally true. But maybe the fact that communities could more easily receive massive delegations from Steemit Inc. could incentize developers to make apps that reach outside the narrow Steemit area. But developing projects (and putting time in it), with no guarantee it will attract users (in fact, the only guarantee you have is to be almost certain to have lost a lot of time). With a delegation from Steemit, you have a chance to attract people, to "pay" developers with upvotes, etc.
For improving lives, OK they improved life but it's the social networking in general that allowed that. The free masons (joke but true) are doing it since a long time, Facebook, Twitter and Instagram didn't invent anything, and Steemit does exactly the same as it is a social network. Steem can bring much more, but for now, it is reduced mainly to Steemit. And for people coming to make a buck from sh$t posting, I think a lot of these accounts are in the statistics, as Inactive. Just try to do so, you will see you will make no money (some upvotes from people with no SP) and nobody with enough Steem Power to give a real upvote will never upvote a sh$t post.
In fact a lot of them are so skittish about using their Steem Power to upvote others than themselves - or delegating to bots - that they won't even upvote quality posts. Sorry for the rant here, but that's an impression I have in my journey (of course they are exceptions), but the fact that "whales" (orcas and dolphins included) upvote only people of their kind (or are unintentionnaly circle voting) are at least as much responsible of the poor quality content here than the third world spammers trying to make a few cents.
For your conclusion, I agree at a 100 %. Steem has so much potential, we need to take action and make it as we want.
I just saw your last post :
https://busy.org/@motoengineer/can-we-better-our-communities-on-this-blockchain
I think that's exactly the kind of mentality we need from people holding a faire amount of Steem Power, and that includes Steemit Inc.