Too much choice can create complexity and parts of the technology could have sharp edges. Sovereignty can be scarry and it may not be for everyone.

Perhaps most users didn't really want sovereignty, never really wanted to have to understand the tech to some extent to use it. And they were perfectly comfortable with other options available, where everything was done for them:

* "So many clients, each with their own caveats. Does this client accept this NIP?",

* "So many algorithms to choose from, which one did I try last again?? Ughh, I just want it to work."

* "Is this the right account for the person I wanna follow or is this an impersonator?",

* "If I wanna test a new client, how do I know I can trust it with my Nsec?",

* "Oh God! What if I lose my Nsec??".

"Ughh, I guess I will just stick with Meta, where it is safe and comfy and all my friends are there".

That along with the alternatives not melting down. It turned out that somehow X, Meta, YT, etc didn't become completely unusable to most people, just barely useable enough that people can justify sticking to it and not have to learn something new and foreign.

It turned out that CBDCs didn't really suck and worked ok for most people, so the masses didn't rush to Bitcoin. Which meant that many were first introduced to it when first using/hearing about Nostr. So now they had to deal with the complexities of Nostr and of Bitcoin... And it was a tough learning curve for most people.