There are factors not discussed a lot except in general terms, however once folks begin poking their way around here they either notice things not adding up and not understand why, or they do understand. Neither of which promotes mass adoption.
The first thing I realized is the math of the inflation doesn't entice mass adoption. I remember the dismay I had when I first joined reading the charges against many of reward pool rape, even when they were using their own stake to upvote their posts. I was confused at first, wondering why a person couldn't use their own stake as they saw fit. Or in other cases, high stake holders would vote posts up that would cause anger in others over the size of the reward pull on the pool. Both scenarios leading to others of high stake downvoting the rewards to decrease that pull.
I always read it was the fault of the greedy stakeholder or the post was being rewarded to high, or a disagreement on the topic usually (not talking of the plagiarism). At no time was the math involved in the reward pool ever mentioned as the culprit, never mentioned it couldn't accommodate such large pulls without quickly diminishing others share. Seems pretty easy to understand, despite these omissions that if the reward math was really capable of allocating decent rewards to all none of this would be an issue.
This was further demonstrated to me by many I've seen who come with large followings who get downvoted heavily by a select few whales. Often being called the most obscene while they are downvoted. There is a push by a few in the upper echelon to ensure no one with a large following settles in, builds a foundation and pushes to have their followers aid in mass adoption. I suspect this is because these few upper echelon know all to well that the math is not conducive to mass adoption lest everyone get crumbs (the masses who come do actually get crumbs).
Then we see the push to reward in alternate made coins on Steemengine, a further push to obfuscate the fact the reward pool in and of itself is not capable of a mass adoption that would be lucrative to those of large followings. I know I read a lot about how much is Fakebook paying, but that argument doesn't apply other than as a mind game since the presentation has always been come here and earn.
All in all, in its current state relying almost solely on rewards for social posting, this system is not conducive to a mass adoption and as people come and don't produce any significant results they will not buy into the talking points that defy what they witness as their experience here. Most certainly won't invest, as all the indications for most is it just doesn't make sense, especially if they were sold the bill of goods on coming here to earn. I say this as someone who has invested a little (which is more than most) and can see firsthand that money would have earned far more elsewhere, as well as my time. I'm still here although my participation is fluid, but moresso from connections I made than any expectancy of making money. In two and a half years I've realized perhaps 500.00 from rewards, and given taxes and fees to cash out (not even sure how to cash out) that's really maybe a couple hundred. And from what I've seen, I've been very blessed here compared to most.
In the end, for there to be mass adoption a realistic view of the reward pool adopted into the narrative will have to take place for there to be any mass adoption. As well as a stop to those with followers being chased off by a select few.
I hear what you're saying - I think the Wolfe's latest proposal about an individual reward pool is the epitomy of what you say.
I think what we'ere seeing is the masses being rational - however, there are plenty of greedy, stupid and lazy people out there - hence why I think Hive has a future, in economic terms,
The underlying blockchain fundamentals are sound I think, just the economics are shite!