> “This is a simple reality of social beings”

Yes. This simple reality that we naturally “follow” or “amplify” what others are doing is indeed a hallmark of sociality. This is a centralizing force that we leverage to learn from and align with each other.

Centralization is what we do well, almost too well. Centralization creates bigger societies and feeds bigger government and bigger business.

No. I am not suggesting equality of outcome. Indeed, equality can only be measured and outcome can only be enforced by the same centralizing forces. Not this.

To be clear, I am pointing out the obvious fact that (as is human nature) followers will always prefer to amplify the signal that others are following. Having less to do with quality of content than influencer power, this IS a centralizing force. No bones about it.

I have no solution or desire to define or impose fairness. I am simply pointing out the irony of “decentralization” as a desired feature in a social network.

It ain’t easy.

It has everything to do with indifference to decentralization, if the money in the system goes to rich celebrities as homage, rather than developers, creators, and service providers as payment for goods or services rendered.

Then the producers go to those celebrities for income, turning them into supplicants to centralized monetary dispersal, rather than entrepreneurs in a free market, selling directly to consumers and competing on quantity, quality, and price.

If the money is centralized, then the power is also centralized because the decision-making is centralized.