I have been thinking about a post along the lines of what you have said here. You have done a better job than I think I would have done.
Your suggestions would help the Steemit situation.
The only thing I might add is that we consider the concept of "value" (perhaps your quality of content") in relation to outcome.
I see a lot of posts decrying that the writer's "well thought and excellently written" (in their own judgement) didn't receive the Steemit attraction they thought it should. This is usually closely followed by the "not fair" argument.
The question that should be put to these judgements is "Did your post provide content to OTHER people?"
Personally, I write things all the time that I, ME, and MYSELF all think are great...but I am also aware that my viewpoints and interests aren't shared by a lot of people. So I may be disappointed that my work didn't receive the accolades I thought it should, but I also recognize that I have to provide value to OTHER people if I want them to pay me in huzzahs or in SD.
This is a point that folks should think about as far as outcomes are concerned.
Thanks for the kind words @stevescoins. Agree with what you say and I think this paragraph captures it well, maybe I should have highlighted it:
"Whether you decide to write science or drama, the one key aspect to keep in mind is relevance to your particular audience(Steemit community). To the extent that posts resonate with the community, they will be significantly rewarded."