This post kind of highlights the need for greater clarity on the direction of the social media aspect of this blockchain.

Are we developing this blockchain with the creators in mind who are being censored and as well as the audiences that exist on other platforms who are watching their favorite shows disappear?

Or are we focusing maybe too heavily on, worthwhile and promising albeit, aspects of the transaction capabilities that this blockchain is making great progress on. I say this because if the goal is to create this beautiful and ever expansive blockchain too lucrative to not buy up by a company(ies), then can we make that clear?

As an average Joe on Hive who invested when steem was $1 all the way up and down to $4, I would love to see common sense things like allotting enough HP to new accounts so they could post 4 times a day and comment in-between 10-25 times a day, happen.

I understand onboarding Content Creators from platforms from Youtube, dlive or now Bitchute can be tricky but this space needs these content creators with audience reach of 100,000-500,000 subs on youtube, facebook and even twitter that has 10k plus views on engagement with videos and posts etc. They Should be given a creators token. This token would be voted on by the top 20 witnesses or 30 a to who gets it.

This token would bring guaranteed upvotes for exclusive content creation for Hive all the while advertising Hive to their large audiences.(this part really is unnecessary but the bottom part about downvotes I think is)
BUT most importantly if a down vote was to happen that would strike away the content creators content, thus discouraging further content creation with said token than an committee delegated by the witnesses or the top 20 themselves would have to decide on allowing the vote.

This would decentralize censorship but still allow for it if needed to protect the blockchain from unnecessary pressure from goberments.

Hopefully, this message is taken kindly.