You're the one ignoring my main points and it's getting annoying.
There is no point in continuing here if you aren't going to accept the possibility that you are doing this. I already pointed to the example of the philosophy behind hive's design being anarchist, which you said was inaccurate and which I then responded to and can easily back up with evidence. You then just never commented again. This kind of thing really annoys me (not just with you but with anyone) when the topic is important, because it always results in a deadlock and complete waste of time - either that or one party bulldozes the other and ill feelings arise. Mature, meaningful and respectful conversation depends on paying attention to what is said and responding.
I am not ignoring your points, I understand what you are saying and I am doing what I can to point out in response that not everyone values content creators in the same way that you do - just because you have criteria doesn't mean that others will share it, nor should they. Again, this is the basis of voluntarism, no-one tells others how to think and make free will choices - but you insist on doing so. I get it, you don't agree with equality and the freedom to choose to the same degree that I do - it would be easier if the principles involved were clear and our positions in relation to them, because the rest is just details.
You're literally nitpicking about some random low hanging fruit like "what steem was created for", what you gonna send me to its whitepaper after almost 7 years as proof? Who gives a shit what ned the ninjamining scammer and gullible dan wanted and pushed early on and the "amazing" people influencers like dollarvigilante brought here, they've returned close to no fucking value to the platform. If they had, posts about these subjects would be flooded with engagement, new users coming in daily and it rightfully taking a big part of the reward pool. I'd be a fucking moron to try and counter that if that was the case, but alas it's not, so you must be the moron.
Gotta give credit to dtv that at least he's trying this time around, have noticed some few accounts being created for free through ocdb reference to him, although most just inactive.
If there aren't enough posts of enough users in your curation scope who may in one way or another bring some value to Hive or retain some attention then curate something outside of that scope or don't curate at all, or stop complaining over a adjustive downvotes if you want to keep upvoting people you think bring value to the ecosystem but someone else doesn't. I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks this way, if you want I can bring this up in a poll to see what the rest of the community thinks about it.
If these influencers don't want downvotes then prove to us that your content is sought after ON hive, not whatever is happening outside of it. They've had years and probably months of trending time to prove that people here consume the content yet have miserably failed. Am I lying about that? If you don't agree with my downvotes then upvote them higher and take the curation penalty to continue rewarding these influencers you put your hopes in and I'll back off once they show signs of wanting to bring some value to the ecosystem rather than just taking from it, until then literally any regular user is just as valuable if not more.
If you think that the underlying philosophy behind the entire system that you use every day is irrelevant, then we are approaching the situation from such a different view that there probably is no point talking here.
It's clear that layer 1 Hive's community at present has been shaped such that it is not suited to the mindset or intentions that created it originally - as occurs with most great inventions - they are watered down and exploited over time. I may return once layer 2 is more evolved.