Great job on the live-stream today. I'm sure you probably already know, but these things go a long way in building confidence with the community. It was great to see publicly what some of the thought processes are behind the restructuring, and how Steemit will be shifting focus going forward.

I appreciate you taking as much time as you did on my (and smooth's) comments.

I wanted to respond to a few of the remarks you made in the video:

• First of all, I think that it is excellent that you are trying to narrow Steemit's focus, and I agree 100% with the assessment that spreading yourselves too thin was one of the big problems. You are right, that my suggestions came with a lot of "expectations" on what Steemit, Inc. should/shouldn't do, and that maybe it is the expectations that should change. I'm 100% fine with that, although one thing that will help (not just with myself - but with the community as a whole) is if we continue to have the conversation on what those expectations should be. If we know for example (just a hypothetical example) that Steemit is not going to focus on marketing to investors, then it will be clear that the responsibility for that falls on us (the community) if we want anything to happen with it, and we can stop looking at Steemit, Inc. to make that happen. TLDR: It will be really beneficial for us to know what Steemit will and won't be focusing on, so we can align our expectations accordingly.
• I think there was a slight misinterpretation in my comment about delivering changes that investors will be excited about. I definitely was not advocating for any type of "hype" where we are just performing gimmicks to attract investors without adding any real value. I was more getting at the fact that over the past ~2 years, there have been very few changes delivered that would cause people/investors to be interested in Steem. Part of this goes back to the spreading too thing argument, but I think part of it too has been to focus on very long term goals which have been taking literally years to deliver (Communities, SMTs, Mobile App, etc.) and there hasn't been much substance that shows we have really done much in the meantime.
• Lastly, I would like to challenge the sentiment that was expressed in the video, which was it seemed you didn't care about investors. Sorry if I interpreted that wrong, but that is how it came off (i.e. it almost made you sick). I would argue that it is possible to still hold true to your core objective of bringing the benefits of cryptocurrency to more people, and at the same time have the expectations of investors in mind when deciding where to focus. It is not to say that we should make decisions solely for investors at the cost of sacrificing core principles, but I believe that evaluating what does and doesn't make Steem as a blockchain and STEEM as a cryptocurrency attractive for investors is a very important thing to be doing.