Yeah most of the time the issue lies with the upvoters, it's like they have no frame of judgement of what constitutes good rewards and the factors one should take into account before placing the big votes. Unfortunately a lot of big accounts do this and one of their main defenses is "oh it's just $20/$40, who cares" while the value doesn't matter much it's a lot of stake that could be going to a lot of other more deserving accounts.
If people have issues depleting their voting power in a fair basis there's plenty of other ways to use it that's a net positive for Hive, for example hbd.funder comments. You shouldn't thereby use the excuse that "oh we just didn't find enough good posts to curate that day so we voted these few accounts with huge votes" while there are plenty of posts that go unnoticed and unrewarded, some I've been stumbling upon accidentally too in their big community. Not gonna get into the whole why huge communities with a ton of "whatever posts as long as it's somehow finance related" are often a bad idea and make the life of curators & engagement/attention thus retention hard as in this case it's most likely rogue curators being tipped off to upvote certain alt accounts for whatever reason. This isn't something that only affects leo.voter and I wish I could say with 100% certainty that it doesn't happen in OCD but I can't cause it's hard to spot them and some may be better at hiding that fact than others, but the way leo's been using their voting power has seemed like it's more than just negligence unfortunately.