At a very basic level, Hive is a community that "rewards content creators and curators for creating content and engaging with it."

Certainly, Hive is a lot of other things, as well, but for the moment I'm going to focus on the social site.

Over the past couple pf months, I have noticed a number of discussions centered around the issues of rewards, bid bots, vote buying and various related topics. I suppose these are almost inevitable points of contention in the context of a place that offers "compensation" for its fundamental activities.

Most of these discussions revolve around who is getting the benefits, and how much they're getting, and by what means they're getting those benefits.

But I think it's important that we also poke around in who cares, and why do they care.

There are different ways of looking at and approaching this situation.

We can look at it at the root level of personal perspective: that is, seeing a situation and deciding whether it benefits you and thus you're in favor, or whether it seems like it's taking away from you, in which case you're opposed.

Of course, the problem we invariably run into there is that everybody has an opinion.

We ultimately have a situation that's a bit like running a village or a town or a city or even a country; people bring different perspectives and objectives to the table. Arriving at 100% consensus is almost a guaranteed impossibility — we all want different things, according to our needs and beliefs.

Looking at these discussions I made myself take a step back and stop worrying so much about how anything benefits (or not!) myself directly and instead consider the broader question of what is good for Hive as a community, for its overall health and growth and simply putting my trust in the idea that if Hive is thriving then I will thrive — by association — without having to push my personal agenda.

Albert Einstein famously said: ”No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it,” and perhaps that’s something we must apply to solving Hive’s issues.

Regardless of whether we have a big stake or a small one, perhaps it would behoove us to step away from the question of "what's in it for ME," and instead approach the problem for from the perspective of what's in it for Hive.

It’s entirely possible — even likely — that the best solution for the entire ecosystem isn’t the one that will put the most money in your pocket, right now.

If we instead think of Hive as a ”Golden Goose” that lays gold eggs, wouldn’t it behoove us to take care of and nurture the goose before we worry so much about ”how many eggs will that give ME, today?”

Of course, it ultimately becomes a game of philosophical/psychological orientation, along with that question of patience and the need for instant gratification.

I'm reminded of one of the lessons from college days, in which the question is whether you'd rather have $1,000 right now, or $1 a day guaranteed for the rest of your life. For a college student — who might well live another 60 years — $1 a day for 60 years translates to $21,900... and yet? The vast majority of those asked would rather just have $1,000 right now, and to hell with the future!

And yes, I realize endless arguments can be made about investing the $1,000 yourself... and ending up with a better result.

Just as a couple of points of reference, $21,900 is more than twice the the present value 9adjusted for inflation) of $1,000 60 years ago, but substantially less than what you'd have if you put that $1,000 into a stock market index fund and left it alone for 60 years.

Which goes to illustrate the conundrum of this whole discussion: It is simple in our nature that we all believe we can fare "better than average," even though doing so is mathematically impossible!

Ultimately, the closest we can come to building Hive is focusing on Hive's well-being, rather than our own individual well-beings.

Feel free to leave a comment — this IS "social" media, after all!

10% @commentrewarder bonus active on this post!

=^..^=