I couldn't agree more with this, "We should instead embrace both, which was always the original vision of Steem to begin with."

If the message from Steemit seems contrary to this, then we need to change the way we're communicating about it. Figuring out how to talk about Steem's hybrid approach to consensus is my real goal here. Maybe I'm asking the wrong question and the right question is, "How do we talk about Steem's unique approach which features both hard and soft/embedded consensus." But in a way that ordinary people can understand.

"Steem uses a novel hybrid approach to decentralized computing which features both hard and embedded consensus. This provides the security of smart contracts with the flexibility of traditional programming." Thoughts?