I very strongly agree. Over a million accounts were made on Steem despite the difficulty. Now most of them are inactive, the users gone. Clearly, what they thought they were signing up for was worth a steep learning curve. What they learned is that what they thought they were signing up for was not what they had actually signed up for, and what Steem really provided was not worth additional effort.

Until this problem is understood and rectified, onboarding masses of people will only further poison the market against a Steem that is not ready for them. I note HF21 indicates that the reasons most new users quit remain true: stake weighting enables substantial stakeholders to take ~90% of the rewards. HF21 will more than halve author rewards, and more effectively concentrate rewards in the wallets of substantial stakeholders. If I am right, this will result in lower Steem price, lower market cap, and fewer users.

I recommend the Huey Long algorithm be applied to rewards instead of HF21, but since that will not be possible, after HF21 worsens the problems Steem has with user retention, Steem value, and Market Cap. We will not see substantial investor interest until capital gains are potential to Steem, and that will require the value of content to inure to the creators of it, instead of substantial stakeholders. It may seem counterintuitive that allowing value to go to others will increase the value of the holdings of substantial stakeholders, but that is what is necessary to grow a market, and only successfully growing the market for Steem will potentiate capital gains.

Substantial stakeholders want more tokens. They want to increase the value of their stake. However these two potentials counteract each other. The way to increase the value of the stake held in Steem is to increase the value of the token, and the way to do that is to distribute the token more widely, not concentrate it in the wallets of those with the most of it.