Thanks for stopping by and sharing your perspective. (And for your incredible work on PeakD which helped me to share my ideas here.)

Centralization of focus on ONE PAY mechanism which is 2. Speculative 3. Not controllable by the creator and 4. will never be capable of supporting thousands of full time content creators let alone hundreds of thousands.

ONE PAY mechanism

YouTube, Uber, and Fiverr only had 1 pay mechanism for years, not sure I'd consider this relevant...

1. finite

This is a great point @jarvie , and to me, the best one I've seen in all 300+ comments. Thank you for pointing it out. And if Hive isn't ready to scale or sustain their current 'crypto-for-consumption' features, then there's no real point in marketing them. (Though it would be targeting consumers which are much easier to support, since they're used to swiping for free, so swiping for even 0.0001 Hive is still a win for them.) That said, I was under the impression that the more people who join, the higher Hive's token-value rises, and the more the rewards pool is able to pay out, but perhaps I've misunderstood something.

1. Speculative

The consumers I'd be targeting wouldn't really care since they're used to swiping for free, so swiping for even 0.0001 Hive is still a win for them.

1. Not controllable by the creator

Again, I'd be targeting consumers with this approach --a powerful demographic Hive is sorely lacking-- and one that'd make a great fit. But even if I were, targeting creators, they have as much control as a video-poster has on YouTube or an Uber-Driver has on Uber. Both projects started from nothing, grew with the model I'm suggesting, and succeeded quite epically.

1. will never be capable of supporting thousands of full time content creators let alone hundreds of thousands.

Understood, and totally fair point, if true. I don't know enough about Hive's business model, cashflow, and sustainability to comment here. I assume you know more than me and would defer to your knowledge. As I mentioned in response to point 1, if Hive is unable to sustain or scale in this way, then sure, avoid the approach I've outlined. :)

A little feedback I have done polling of dozens of full time content creators from youtube

I totally understand. I've helped a YouTuber grow from 0 to 3,000,000 subscribers, he was my client for a decade and we're close friends. He would agree with your poll, and so would I.

That said, a small point of clarification may be in order:

I've used the word 'consumer' many times in my post and comments, and have done my best to emphasize that my suggestions aren't meant to apply or be targeted at content-creators or YouTubers in anyway. :)

Anyway, I really appreciate your insights and discussion here, I hope I've addressed the points you've raised adequately, but if not, I may have covered them in other comments. Regardless, your point about 'finite' funds stand, and is the most reasonable objection I've seen so far to the brand-direction I've outlined here. And if it's true (I'm not sure how I'd verify), definitely a nail in the coffin to my outlined approach.

To wrap up... thanks again, very much appreciated, and wishing you a great day! :) 🙏