It's a fair comment and you make a lot of good points.
There are people who could fit into multiple Stakeholder groups, but there are also people who might specialise in one group. I am asking for representation via these groupings because those who wear multiple hats can have a conflict of interest.
There are a couple of reasons why I powered down last year and you've touched on some of them. I see a lot of problems for the platform that people are ignoring or are in denial about, which means they are unlikely to be fixed. With the recent mania there is a lot of gorging at the trough going on and while I am happy for people to be making money in the short term I would rather see STEEM become so much more than what it is today. I'm just not convinced any more that it will ever realise it's full potential. To me it is in danger of going the way of Netspace once the mania dies off and a real competitor emerges.
Maybe at that point people will be willing to make the tough decisions, but maybe at that point it will be too late.
To most, money comes first before any visions of a better future for humanity (lol) so I don't doubt that their desire to make money now will hamper the platform's chance at competing when the going gets tough. I feel like a lot of discussions are simply distractions to peel everyone's attention from the real problems with the site, so perhaps they're cleverly keeping people engaged in those discussions by design.
Yeah, without a high price for the coins I don't see what value people will see in the platform, and if we are to consider the very real possibility of a long-term cyclical bear market for crypto then this site is deader than dead once that happens, and that's discounting the fact that other companies are going to absolutely crush the possibility for steemit to be a dominant social media force.
Fiat or metal in the hand feels a lot better than digital bags or non-existant bags, and I feel like this site has been creating more than a few micro-bag-holders of late.