Just noticed this comment. The opening statement I agree with, the rest is here's what my thoughts are:

You missed what the guys were actually saying: Hive wasn't able to deliver social impact in their case because Hive depends on the markets. That's the entire point of discontent and why there's allegations and all the problems going around. It goes back to your general content creator argument. Content creators need to be rewarded and currently there are only a few curation projects. The question is, are we onboarding people with false expectations? Is our platform not suitable for youth?

The content creators you described are blogging adults who already enjoy writing and we know that these people are our age. They're not youth (some of who equated being asked to post as part of their own project with abuse), and they're not leading the adoption of new tech, which Hive technically is. The numbers of these people will decrease over time. Flagging isn't the main issue; the main issue is perception. Flagging isn't a huge of a problem as it may seem unless its flagging for diverging opinions; let's say over political matters. Social media and writings of every kind are becoming increasingly weaponized. We see it here with all the bs being spread in order to create hysteria, but its far more prominent on mainstream social media. No one writes to share information anymore. Everything is botted to all hell.

What's driving people off isn't the flags but the fact that someone can work on a post, spend hours, and not receive anything tangible. We had people tell us they couldn't afford to blog -- they couldn't afford the data costs. They can't afford to eat so how can they afford data. We have an over-reliance on trails, overworked curators, and the perception that content creators are leeches. When curators are paid they're also leeches. No matter what you do you're screwed. But these content creators are like I said, people who want to write, and that puts them within a specific segment of the population. But that segment of the population is working multiple jobs to provide for their families and we can't reward them.

Further, and this is VP related, the scope had to be written in such a way as to prevent opportunistic long-term Hive members who have a sizable non-Hive social media presence from trying to get paid out of VP to talk about Hive or even link to their Hive profiles. This was a problem to the point it had to be written in at the start, because it happened in the pre-VP days. That is just pathetic. Many people promote Hive willingly because they love Hive but many only see money.

This is a general onboarding and retention discussion. It's not a DHF discussion, it's pure onboarding and retention.