>I think that the main problem is ONBOARDING... 

We share a different view of what is and what is not a problem. The STEEM blockchain has become much more than the *one trick pony* which it was when first creating my account here. The social media aspect of STEEM  gives it something special and unique to most other blockchain communities. Something that gives a personality to the hash signatures. 

Do we want to use it to share among the community or see it as a replacement for FaceBook? 

The true value, to me, of STEEM is its fee free, lightning fast transactions 
 scalable blockchain  and its unique form of governance that solved scalability.

Yet that governance uses a form of consensus and consensus is a slow moving machine. 

My vision of STEEM's future is it having countless users that do not even realize they are using the STEEM blockchain. We do not have to onramp them... the dApps will be doing that. 

Imagine, if you will, that the present version of Condenser was slightly modified to share the banner revenue income stream with active accounts on that particular instance of Condenser weighted by stake. Let's call the example tribe example.io. Would you want to onboard more people to share that revenue stream with? Would more people be required to generate that revenue stream in the first place? Well only if they were bringing quality content surely.  As always quality over quantity should be our guide.

My vision need not be the only one, but hopefully shows the big tent that open source can bring and how that can cause it to move slowly on the sea of consensus.

[Edit : spelling]