> This means that people will have to pay up to get them. Since HIVE converted into Hive Power is the only way to generate Resource Credits, it is easy to guess where that impact will be felt.

You're celebrating this as if it's new and revolutionary. It's exactly the same old system which DID NOT do much for steemit. A previous post from you shows that this system does not convert ENTRY USERS into BUYS.

![IMG_20201102_124133.jpg](https://files.peakd.com/file/peakd-hive/teknow/b09VvcGx-IMG_20201102_124133.jpg)

That is a slice of the main chart but the only portion I use and need to determine how well a system is at converting traffic into token price. So then.... the hard truth is... the system is working against itself. Because though a million plus have come through the door, the system was only able to sustain a tenth of that, and worse (since this is a money game) it's only convinced a small group of crypto die hards to buy big.

Coincidentally, the recent report from pablopenguin shows that some of those die hards themselves, have decided to power down. Likely because they want to get on the BTC boat.

My point here is not that the RC System is flawed. My point is that thinking that IT will change the price of the token is.

So then what's the remedy?
I make this point often.

ATTENTION RETENTION.

That the system first needs to build its audience.. BIGLY. These platforms also must understand that "poor people" is going to be their main audience for those early stages. Likely also going to be the bulk.. always. So really, making it easier for those users to stay and feel welcomed is what the system should be.

For example as a new user, you can't even make a community. As a new users, you're literally a nobody. The platform promised rewards, but once here users quickly realise that they need to pay2play and most certainly pay2win. So again by design, the system destroys it's ability to retain that audience and by that kills the likelihood of projects taking off that actually need a large audience. Which is why so many relatively good ideas like quello (mimicking quora) fail, because not a big enough audience to generate activity.

As it stands the only 2 tribes people see as successful here as Splinter and LEO. Personally I only see LEO as the sole success story because that splinter is more about extracting wealth then actually granting it as an opportunity.


LEO exists as a gem because:

1). It's about crypto in the world of crypto (so its audience is already here and the wider audience of blockchain exist as potential).
2). They've identified that ALL users should feel welcomed and have granted many a true ability to be winners.
3). They've realised where the system is working and improved it (UI, Onboarding), or where the system was failing, and changed it (rewards curve, comment engagement).

With that, their recent report shows that their user growth, retainment, attention, content, rewards spread.. are all healthy.

There's no speculation there of "because of this, we will moon." Their efforts are focused on building and then reflecting on the incremental benefits.

I simply have not seen that with Hive. 

Anyway I think you do great work for maintaining morale, but it's often on future (hasn't happened) maybes. Personally I don't see that video from 3Speak positively. They want to give an option that ONLY makes sense when a very large audience is aware of 3Speak.

Repeating the same mistakes of steemit.

Cart before the horse.