The major downfall, or at least something that I think has hurt coins and communities, is the process taking toooooo looooong at each step.
I see it in NEM and NODE. They have lost a lot of community members that were at one point very involved. Then new comers show up and they contribute for awhile until they get sick of of the waiting.
Thanks for your thoughtful comment.
I'd like to agree with you, but I don't, because I question the premise that ppl leave because they get sick of waiting. That is certainly one reason, and not unfounded. But there are many reasons why ppl leave a coin, including a new opportunity. We've all done it. Most ppl reading this have dropped their bags - even at a loss - to pursue a new coin with a new idea or approach. Not to say that they didn't get tired of waiting.
I would also like to point out that it is human nature to become impatient with progress, or lack thereof. But most ppl have no experience of what it is like on the inside of the problem domain. Everything seems simple, but reality intrudes. Even shoddy development is immensely complex. But great development is even more difficult and time-consuming, because by its nature great dev is extensible and scalable. What scalable means in laymans terms is Ora needs to be capable of being a small crypto system with a small user base, all the way to a worldwide crypto system with billions of users, without causing performance and other issues. As for extensibility, it needs to be capable of being extended without breaking existing functionality. That takes careful planning, which in turn takes time.
If Ora can stay on a steady pace and pick up ACTIVE members and NOT lose them along the way this would make Ora fairly powerful.
Almost every complaint I've ever read about a coin comes down to profit. Ppl want to make money off crypto, and to make money they need to buy low and sell high. That process is complicated by the coin fundamentals, and the coin development speed. That's not so different than a tech company promising to release the next big gizmo, in the hopes that they will sell a billion of them. Even then, the share holders make their own decisions about the viability of the gizmo, or its colour or its capabilities, and sell off or buy in based on those ideas. They enter or exit based on their assumptions, and those assumptions may be grotesquely wrong, leading to ruin. Or they could be right, leading to fortune. Or, they could ride along for years in a sideways market.
I don't dispute the importance of momentum. However, I don't want to fool myself into thinking that we have that sort of control or power. Ppl use cryptocurrencies for different purposes. Some are fanboys, some are institutional investors, and some are swing traders. Some think that a portion of crypto users are governments trying to swing the free currency movement one way or another in order to corrupt or kill it.
This is a revolving door, and ppl come and go as they see fit, or as Adam Smith would say, as it suits their motive for gain. That gain is usually but not always monetary. Some ppl who bought BTC at 5 cents and sold at a dollar thought they made a fortune. They exited and made very good on their investment. Others held out and were rewarded with a 900 USD sell, a phenomenal gain. All of this took three or four years, during which BTC was routinely hyped and disparaged for any number of reasons. Ppl got upset and fled, and others took their place.
My point is, I fully expect ppl to get off the bus, and those same ppl I fully expect to get back on when the bus comes around again, or when the bus has a better paint job and new mechanicals. That is Ora. Those who are not satisfied with baby steps may be inclined to get off the bus and wait until the price goes up again. Look at all the coins out there. The most volume is when the coin gets really hot or really cold. When it's hot, the bulls push the bears into selling high. When it is cold, the bears pound the bulls into dumping into the floor. Everyone wants to cheer for the winning team.
Ora, like all other coins, will have its fair-weather fans, who latch on when Ora's growth curve is positive, and get out when things look bleak. Or, when they need money. Or any number of reasons.
My advice is to keep things moving. Regular updates with where we were, were we are at now, and where we are going next, and in the future.
We are committed to doing what we can, but not necessarily toward an end that you are expecting. If I could summarize the theoretical underpinning of Ora, I would have to say: "an overnight success takes a decade of hard work." Ora is here for the long haul, to build quality. Quality attracts success.
The ultimate prize in this business is becoming the de-facto e-currency for a new era of money that is not centrally controlled. That is what all of the serious contenders are vying for. Some would argue that BTC is already positioned for that. I'm not convinced. Lots of 800-kg gorillas have been dethroned by underdogs. BTC is vulnerable not because it is a bad system, though I see some real problems with it; BTC is vulnerable for the simple reason that it is the top dog, and eventually one of the hundreds of little dogs nipping at its heels will cause it to stumble and perhaps even crash and burn.
kind regards,
nio