Some myths:
Voting on rewards is comparable to donating, the same type of fallacious thinking that argues apples are oranges or that the borders to your property are the same as the borders to a country, all of it is the same error of thinking or a false analogy. To strike this like a gong, loud and clear, it's exactly like donating the water condensate from your AC, or the parking spot assigned to you at work, or the bandwidth from your mobile, yeah they are nice "considerations" but none of those cost you anything.
SP is being "wasted". Ultimately curating isn't about using your sp every time it gets to 100%, and all it promotes is a clusterfuck of automation. When you don't have the incessant need to maximize profits, you give others a chance to reward more, so the myth that is wasted clearly stinks. If you don't vote, others have more shares to allocate with their votes. If you incessantly vote without even consuming or least considering the content then you cannot escape the consequences which are in the form of the garbage that is voted and also in turn the diminished shares others have at their disposal.
I think that if you're here for the greed you ought to go fuck off, it doesn't matter where to, most likely when the price soars you'll get the fuck out and forget about the rest, and as far as those investors engaging with the community, the only thing of value from them in my opinion is complete, total disengagement.
I didn't say this. The process of needing to make the decision each time is similar.
do you understand how paragraphs work? one topic?
Each time you make a decision to choose to donate to one charity of another or any charity at all, you are picking a candidate for your action. I used the word vote in context to the bigger picture to tie things together and as far as Steem goes, why would I use the term deduction?
As for this, normally you make some sense but this doesn't, at least to me. Which function of curation are you talking about and which premise?
Nope, you have missed the point and completely ignored the section about patrons. My parents owned a gallery when I was a kid in a small town, they sponsored a few local artists so they had some space to create without having to worry about working for food and a roof. They didn't check every piece of art, they didn't peek over their shoulder to make sure they were doing 'right', they gave them space.
It is a position based on trust that gets reviewed from time to time. This is what patrons do. In so doing, the work of the artists were able to develop and get a much, much wider consuming audience than would likely have been possible without the support.
You want good content, support good content creators by giving them the space to do what they do. I find some people, I vote on some people. In my year and a half here I have cast over 38,000 votes, manually.
What are you talking about no self-sacrifice? I am yet to use a steem of what I have earned here regardless of my real world position and have distributed a hell of a lot more than many other other people who have earned more in much easier ways then myself. It is fine for those without SP to be on a high horse but when it comes to distribution, it is the people with SP who are doing it.
voting isn't a social act, it is a transaction.
Ah, you mean leave the pool completely to the bidbots? Interesting method for helping content producers there.