"I think we need to find answers to these questions."
These questions were well answered in 2017, when a flood of new users to the platform began after April. The poor treatment by Web2 platforms that profited immensely from their social media posts, contrasted by the platform's promise to neither censor nor ban people for posting their honest thoughts, and the prospect of their audience paying them directly, was exactly what hundreds of millions of people wanted, and those that found the platform making those promises thought they had found it.
However, those promises were not kept, and ~1M users that undertook the onboarding process and learning curve were incessantly censored and functionally banned by the ruling junta DV'ing their every post and comment to 0. That was done to prevent the majority of stake held by that junta from being distributed to a large user base and depriving them of complete control of platform governance, which they retain to this day.
Today the foetid stench of that betrayal of the market continues to precede discussion of the platform, and pro-actively prevents new users from joining, and continually discourages users that expected to persist on the platform from doing so. The false claim that the platform is censorship resistant is widely known to be false, because the tens of thousands of influencers that signed up and intended to bring their audiences here made sure their audiences were well aware of what happened to them.
The only marketing department social media platforms need are popular creators happy to be posting their content on those platforms. That's the target the ruling junta censored and demonetized, in order to retain complete control of governance and money flows from the rewards pool. You seem to have come to understand this, from your most recent post stating you are powering down. It must have been very disappointing to you, and I wish I could do something about it.
I have tried with every ability I have to convince the junta that they would profit by relaxing their grip and making governance something each and every person had a stake in, rather than perpetuating their total control through plutocratic power, but I have failed. Several forks have tried to change how the platform worked, but none have succeeded either, while Blurt yet persists, it does so burdened by other issues stemming from centralization.
True decentralized governance of social media hasn't been tried yet, and claiming plutocratic governance is anything other than the age old Golden Rule by them that have the gold would be a funny joke if humanity wasn't staring WWIII down the barrel today, that a truly decentralized platform that enabled people to speak freely and be compensated by their audience might have prevented.
Thanks for asking though, and it was nice knowing you while you were here.