If one small circle of users is deciding what is a circle jerk, isn't that just a new circle jerk?

The monkeyshere/Dunbars number....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar's_number
https://www.cracked.com/article_14990_what-monkeysphere.html

Universal vision?
It's a utopian concept not in line with the reality of us, the biological unit.
(The same biological unit that, for all intents and purposes, is the same creature wandering the plains and killing mammoths....that's why communism always fails past the local level. On a very small scale, communism can be efficient and productive, but it doesn't scale up.
Mmmmm....Monkeyshpere, anyone?)

It's not right nor wrong, but just is what it is.

The value is in the eyes on the site. Eyes on the site creates Demand.

...but only if the eyes on the site like what they see. If it's attractive.

Seeing someone with big stake, take rewards 20x bigger than another's persons posts -just for writing the same regurgitated babble , three times a day, for two years - does not make it an attractive proposition.

This is the weakness of DPOS being the decider of the distribution of resources.

I've started publishing on publishox now, and do you know what's the nicest thing about it, is?
You can see how many people have viewed your post.

(I am sure the reason steem took down the view counts, was exactly because this imbalance between 'rewards' and views, was blatantly obvious.
.....which suits the DPOS system of course - but doesn't make demand - doesn't make it attractive - to eyes on the site. But even now, you can see 600 upvotes on a post, and 20x the rewards because of circle jerking stake size.....and these post get from zero to 3 comments a time!
People are not stupid.
Ego's are.
A conundrum of to which I fear, the solution may never be resolved.

Not because there isn't one, but because human nature will out - and people with 'power' will never give it up willingly.
(ego grows with power, and the ego would prefer to go down with the ship screaming 'I'm right! I'm right!' - rather than facing up to the fact they are in the wrong..)

The big stakeholder's selfish gene, is taking precedence over the small person selfish gene, (as is natural).

It's not new - it's very old in fact - 'might is right', and all that.

BUT you can't sell some 'new economy', or a 'new ecosystem', on something that's not new at all .... it's just a rehash of the same old dynamic that's been in operation for centuries.

Just different players (early adopters, ninja miners) taking up the throne. Nothing new in that.
The only difference here - and it's a big difference - is that historically, there was no choice to participate in the system or not - you were forced into it by life itself.

Steem isn't the same. It's voluntary.
People rarely sign up voluntarily to a system that has the perception of being very 'unfair'.

It's kinda ironic, isn't it? ...consider the sheer amount of times that people have posted on here with 'it's not for everyone', or 'no one if forcing you to join'.
And that's the whole point...

People are not joining.
It is not growing.
It is because people do not see it as an attractive proposition.
Very simple.

Without investing money ( being a financial player) and using it as just as a social media blogging platform - why would they choose here?

1/They see rewards being distributed according to how 'rich' you are, and not on the merit of your content.

2/ They cannot see how popular their own blogs are ( no view counts on your posts, only upvotes to gauge it by, and they are not a gauge, as we know).

3/ They 'feel punished' through down votes. (rightly or wrongly).

4/ They feel powerless against big stakeholders - they can be bullied via down votes.

What is attractive about this proposition? for the average blogger?

I'M NOT BASHING STEEM, it is what it is.