You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Ned Talks: Steem, Steemit, and SMTs
That would explain the dismal retention rates ~13%.
1 million sign-ups doesn't mean much when you throw that into the mix, does it? I think its embarrassingly low. If I was a lead developer, I'd try to address that. But so far, I see a lot of talk and not a lot of action producing real results.
Prove me wrong, but I'm not holding my breath.
Imagine the retention rate of Bitcoiners in 2013 :)
That's a bizarre analogy. Bitcoin isn't a extremely-gated token that has a massive float like Steem.
It also doesn't have a parasitic ecosystem of voting/follow bots.
Steemit is doomed without some substantial changes, and the metrics out there show its absolutely horrible at doing what its defined to do -- get people interacting, and keeping them there.
totally agree ... it's good not to be the only one who thinks
Not really that bizarre considering the FUD and ignorance that existed at the time for Bitcoin and blockchain tech in general. I'm sure you agree many of the early adopters of Bitcoin were just as parasitic as those existing on Steem making it as unfair as possible.
Again, you missed the points in my prior post.
Perhaps re-read it, I don't have time to guide you through it again.
Sorry to waste your BCH FUD'ing time.
Your altfork is doomed, so are a lot of others that don't understand the technicals. Read this, if you dare -- it might save you a lot of money.
https://medium.com/@StopAndDecrypt/the-ethereum-blockchain-size-has-exceeded-1tb-and-yes-its-an-issue-2b650b5f4f62
Scaling isn't easy -- and its much easier to make mistakes like ETH and BCash have.