Hive is a different ballgame, because it requires content creators to build themselves into the community, to engage, to be "industry experts" even if the industry is Hive itself. A painter or photographer can't just drop their images and assume support, a writer can't just dump text - there has to be more to it, there has to be value for the audience and to get vote value, that audience either has to be staked, or be of the kind that staked users feel it is worth using their vote value to support the content that serves them.
What about organised and automated mass voting trailers and communities that ask you for HP for those mass votes? There you lose the sense of talking about “objective followers”. I insist I know a multitude of users who have automated their votes to users who, as you have been, exceeding the famous little number of «reputation» >75. How to evade the mental algorithm of the third-world user?, who don't even deign to read the contents…
Votes aren't followers - they are votes. Most of the trails are also relatively worthless - they have very long tails, possibly following a larger voter. I don't know anyone who would pay in HP to get votes. However, some of those curation projects are valuable, because they find content most might not, so healthy ones spread voting value to those who might deserve it. But, I am a staunch believer that there is a "deserve" somewhere in there too, since a lot of people feel that they should get value regardless of what they post.
I also don't think anyone with any real stake gives a toss about the reputation number and haven't for many years.
Can't speak for third-world users - they do what they do, get the results they get. I know some who have changed their ways to better suit their content to the audience, but many don't seem to get out of their mindset. We are products of our environment.