I know a few forensic accountants and, despite the fact that their personal lives are either so boring you have to check them for a pulse or so exciting you have to check yourself for a pulse, they seem to be good, stable people. Which is probably why they avoid getting involved with cryptocurrency and blockchain technology at all costs. (Why either you or I are here is left as an exercise for the reader.)

(Maybe we are simply too exciting.)

Clearly, some people care about STEEM as a currency/commodity and the blockchain itself as – something. Easy money, a vague idea, whatever. There's way too much vitriol and passion thrown around the place like blood at a crime scene for no one to actually care. Part of the problem is probably that people care about a huge diversity of things that just touch and there really hasn't been any consolidation of communities who have similar interests in their parts of the space of people that feel that it's rewarding.

Not necessarily financially rewarding but personally, emotionally gratifying.

Which also drives part of not being interested in spending days analyzing stuff that people won't be interested in. Ideally, as analysts, engaging in some of the blackest arts in what is truly journalism, we are not doing it because other people might be interested in it, we're doing it because we're interested in it. If the process itself isn't delivering results that fascinate you, maybe it's time to reconsider the things you're looking at and reallocate time and attention so that you are getting that electric charge when stuff is revealed for the first time in front of you.

At a certain point, going through the motions just to have the motions gone through probably shouldn't be enough for us.

That's not to say I have any answers; not good ones anyway. I do feel like we need some.