Personally I think people aren’t managing expectations properly.
We know there is a lot in the pipe for ICON. Between all of the projects coming online in the next couple months (Balanced DAO, Omm Finance, ICON FI, Stash and more), and everything we know is in the works with MYID, as well as various other initiatives from players like Seoul Metro, Busan and now MyData initiatives, there is a lot to look forward too. Visitme, Broof and Zzeung are consistently increasing adoption too.
Frankly speaking: the ICON network is functionally only a little over a year old. Yes, the name and the “network” have been around since late 2017/early 2018, but there wasn’t anything to actually integrate, implement and adopt until it was properly decentralized October 2019.
In the last 13 months or so, we have seen a tremendous amount of adoption and work that will undoubtedly increase transactions and network effect, so as a long time community member and P-Rep, I have absolutely -zero- concern about the “transaction volume” concern people keep talking about.
Also, as an interesting side note, ICON transactions are higher in volume then most leading projects right now, regardless of the “source”. So it’s kind of baffling to me this is an issue at all. I think, sadly, this has just become another scape goat for lagging price performance rather then a real contributor like some are thinking.
As far as helping the cause. I think building meaningful applications, tools and resources for/on ICX. The more interest we can drive in usecases, especially those that abstract the “cryptocurrency” side of things, the better!