This is a very interesting analysis of the situation... and I appreciate being able to see this data.
Of course, the thing we cannot measure readily is the Human Psychology angle. I would venture a very large percentage of inactives are the result of people having unrealistic expectations of the phrase "Get paid for creating content!" People see those words... perhaps presented in the context of someone like Jerry Banfield or the Dollarvigilante... so they give it a whirl for a week and then give up.
The other variable — more measurable — is the number of inactives tracked vs. the trendline on the price of Steem. When Steem declines, activity declines... people just get depressed and give up.
The above two factors — assume, of course, hat people's primary motivation for being involved is "to make money" rather than "to create content," or "to build a social media presence."
Personally, I am here for marketing reasons, not money reasons... the rewards are just a fringe benefit that makes this a more attractive proposition than so many other social platforms.
Thank you for the analysis!
As for your suggested "fixes," here are some thoughts:
On the UI: To this day I find it baffling to sit in 2018 and hard code my content in HTML. WTF? It's 2018; time for widget driven drag and drop. The whole HTML-3 "1998 message board" look doesn't work for the average web user... so much attrition could simply be due to "This is too hard to figure out." It's almost like the place was built by developers who are oblivious to the fact that not the entire world is a developer... The whole UI needs a massive overhaul and oversight by some professional Usability Engineers.
As for part two, that's a dodgy topic. STINC seems really more interested in the Steem blockchain than Steemit the front end. The energy and delegations seem to be mostly going towards those who wish to develop apps or create SMTs. On the surface, that might OK-ish... but the problem is that this focus is very "wholesale" oriented... end users (where we have the retention problem) is a "retail" issue. So metaphorically speaking, you can build the greatest shopping center in the world, but if there are no customers it doesn't amount to a damn thing!
As for the delegations for new accounts, I have no issue with it... BUT I think there needs to be a MUCH clearer message: "Hello and welcome to Steemit! We have LENT you 15SP to get you started, and which will be yours to work with for 60 days AND THEN WE TAKE IT BACK!" Right now, nobody knows how, what, where and how long it's for...
Thanks for your comment and kind words !
I agree with every word you say. But as I don't really like too consensual comments, I will try to add information (and oppose, with little will I confess) to the things you said.
For the expectations, of course (and I said it in another comment), people come here to make a quick buck, that's the main argument in Steemit promotion. "Do what you're already doing elsewhere, but make money in the process."
People leaving when they realize Steemit doesn't live up to its promises is OK with me, but if the site was well designed, comfortable to browse, maybe they would stay for the few bucks it can reward them with. There's a lot of nice people here, concerned people, great discussions taking place so for me, if the people are leaving when desillusioned about rewards, it also tells us they're leaving because they were ONLY doing it for the rewards. If the site was better than (or at least as good as) the competition, a bigger fraction of people would stay even with rewards lower than their first expectations.
For the price of STEEM, the link is clear (even if I didn't provide with data), but we're seeing it right now, since a few weeks.
For the fixes :
Thanks again for your well-constructed and informative comment !