I hear this post and think your statement about short term wins and longterm failures is important. When I look at Bitcoin I see a coin which was once less then a dollar and not widely known. It has overcome both of those things overtime.
When I look at Steem I see something different from Bitcoin, different strengths and different weakness, but also different purposes.
I see cryptocurrency as multiple sum game not zero sum. Bitcoin doesn’t have to fail for Steem to win, and that’s the beauty of the long game: understanding that there is room in the future for many winners, as there are many people to serve and many niches to fill.
Steem is a longterm play and your concept of the Birdseye view can ease the wounds of those who bought Steem much much higher, by reassuring them that in the longterm they may regain their paper losses. But the Longview should have them adding to their positions as they are able with money they can afford to invest longterm.
Write on 😊
This is something that lots of people do not consider. they seem to think only one is necessary for the world. It is more like a pair of shoes, you need the right set for conditions.
The highest price that could have been paid was in a very small period of time and most large buyers wouldn't have bought at that point. add on top earnings from curation and post returns etc, and the cost average paid goes way down. If someone bought 1000 Steem at 6 dollars at the high (6000), they could now have about 1400 Steem via curation, so they need ~4,20 to break even. if they got disillusioned and went inactive... they still need around 6 dollars.