I often wonder about the actual context of discussions around "the algorithm". Do I want an algorithm that is better at...

A. showing me the best content?
B. getting me the widest distribution?

It's such a difficult discussion to have in public, because 

1. No one in the 1% that creates content is ready to accept these two directions may be conflicting, ie. that my content is not that great.

2. The typical 90% that is mostly reading/liking is obviously in favor of A, but they are (by definition) not vocal.

3. Even between the 1-10% of users who post content, some are interested in writing (they want to share, and usually they only care about a few, specific, users reading them, their circle) and those who are interested in getting read (they will create based on what gets them attention).

Good luck to anyone trying to reconcile all these in a public discourse.

When you're casting: give me the widest distribution!

When you're scrolling: show me only the stuff I want to see

I'm far from an expert on this topic. However, upper link doesn't seems to be the post effective. I'm not sure the question is about making kings/queens because this is where legacy social network failed (despite this is definitely a cool power). Algo or not this is the question.

On the other hand, horizontal link could be worth to investigate more. Keep me updated with people I interacted onchain with a proportion consistent with their place in my interaction. It will provide a constant rediscovery feeling. Then add 33% of discovery on what people interacting onchain with same creators in a similar way than my in a proportion depending on similarity.

I think I'd be happy. In app algo isn't enough, follow are scattered, onchain data isn't.