maybe the issue is not the platform evolving but the ones that it is sacrificing on the way. the social media app that we use today is no less important to all the other apps that are going to come in.

i think a sincere attempt must be made to retain the users who got steemit to a point where real apps can come on board.

is it possible that the comment about "not caring for the first million user" is misrepresented? because i cannot imagine a company or a community that can make that statement and then expect to retain the goodwill that will carry them upwards in the future.

Maybe what @davemccoy is saying is that a company could care less but a community always cares. that is the difference, isn't it?

let us put this into a different perspective. most startups struggle to get a user base going. blockchains like steemit get it with far less difficulty by promising rewards. then when the user base leaves, can we make a comment that they dont matter since their job is done and their usefulness is over? in fact blockchains should have high loyalty to its members because they are indeed the difference makers.

i don't know about the rest of you but the reasoning sounds hollow to me.

However i can understand the line of reasoning the minute we stop thinking like a community and instead fancy ourselves as a company or corporation. then everything makes perfect sense.

let us hope that we do our sincere best to retain users who have been part of the community from the outset and who have brought it to this point