Very interesting. The numbers speak for themselves. I love when people dig into the numbers and pull out the facts. It makes life so much easier.
The question is what is more important, authorship or curation? I understand the need for curators. However, when you look at the task if issuing an upvote, even if the person did actually read the article which we know is rare, how long does that take? Compare that with the 30-60 minutes required to put together a good post. Is not the writing of the article more important. Besides, if no article written, nothing to vote on.
Since we know most upvotes are either bots or people voting their friends, I am not sure the quality of content is ever considered.
I totally agree with you! It's not like curators shouldn't be rewarded at all, no! But in my opinion, authors are doing most of the job and trying hard to write a good quality content. It is nothing that can be done in a minute. (Well, depending on the quality of course)
And the fact about most people don't even read the posts is quite sad .... It's like the author is writing everything only for himself.