Nesting reply.
I can't argue with what you say, it makes sense.
Let me throw out a hypothetical. Let's say you own 50% of Facebook , you believe it's going to be successful in the long run. But you're confronted with an incredibly vocal first 2k users, influenced by unsustainable rewards. With opinions shooting out of them, non sensical bullshit you disagree with.
In that situation, if I had the belief that the platform would exponentially grow. Then I wouldn't really care too much about those users... They're early adopters, they're not the average user.
In fact (to be crass) I'd take my big wad of 'fuck you SP' ... and continue with my original vision.
We're so early stage, people seem to think they're more important than they are.
Perfectly reasonable position. Provided your crystal ball is working properly.
If, like the rest of us, you can only speculate about the future by observing the present and recollecting the past.. perhaps less so.
Well, I can't help but notice that neither Dan nor Ned are participating in any of this debate, so perhaps the:
is precisely what's happening...and maybe that's what's best for the platform, as I don't necessarily disagree with your last statement, either:
...but, of course, that's not to say that we should bite our tongues when we feel strongly opinionated about something that directly effects our investments.
Lately, there's a lot of $0.02 going around on this curation topic and I don't think it's so bad to consider starting to listen if one of the sides adds up to something like, say, $100 when the other is still sitting under $1.