Yeah, I noticed myself posts that cost tremendous amount of time and energy to create, can receive little attention while the 'easy' posts get more, much more attention. Strange how the world works. It tells me that social media and rewards are not linked to what work is put into it, but what triggers the people to open and read/view. Most of us (at Steemit but also in all the other social media) are interested in quick to read content of any kind. That in itself is not a problem, but when adding currency revenues to the mix, it becomes a bit of a pain to see quick content getting high rewards.
Communities may be a solution, I dont know. I think with communities we have to stop using Steem as a reward, since when it stays linked, votes will be (partiallY) based on the underlying Steem value given (and received for that matter).
I also think we need more curator groups, more or less moderating the content. We have a few curator groups at the moment, and the numbers are growing a bit with some of the higher SP holders giving their powers to these groups. But I must say, it seems a few curators are part of more than a few curator groups, telling me not so many people want to be curator for these groups and/or these people found a way to maximise their own income. It is the later that is the issue when money is involved.
I actually think Steem blockchain shall allow 'removing' of accounts and content... But now I'm getting completely of topic here...sorry about that :)
It's noting bad to keep STEEM as a reward for communities (sole, or in addition to their own tokens) as long as community will keep their efforts to "e-Steem-ate" value of a content and won't hesitate to use downvotes, as an important tool to adjusting potential reward.
Please explain why you downvoted my posts 🤔