Bingo!

Much to respond to. In part, we have a bit of a chicken/egg thing going... on one hand, we need broad based external exposure for Steemit, preferably done by content providers with large existing support bases. But who wants to recommend a "broken" system to their friends and colleagues? I'd be hesitant about that...

In my 30 days here, I keep coming back to the central issue that communities are built by PEOPLE, not by bots, tech or algorithms. I post an assortment of blog posts and "article style" content... and see it get 150 upvotes while it has 17 actual reads. Well, I don't write for the purpose of having a piece of tech ping my content and leave a mark that means no more than "this content exists." So what? Who cares? Where are the HUMANS who interact with, get inspired by, get angry over, get an insight, etc.? That's what "social" is. Discussions of content in comments... that's also what social is.

So when I back off to the 50,000-foot view, I keep "hearing" a story that goes something like "So a group of developers and blockchain enthusiasts got together over some beers and said 'let's build a social network on a blockchain structure!' and everyone went YEAH and so Steemit was built." Except nobody paused long enough to realize that community doesn't build itself. And that you precisely need to invite in a bunch of people who "don't speak tech" in and let them bring their friends. And they might do "horrible things" like create deep meaningful content that can't just be processed with a script.