Very interesting proposal, I think you might be onto something here. Getting rewarded for finding diamonds in the rough would be a nice incentive for browsing and voting on new posts.
Here is a visualization of the proposal:
And a display of varying E values (labeled x on the table).
Y1 is the author percent, Y2 is the comment percent, Y3 is the activity percent
I think the spreads are nice, but am curious though about how you came up with the 0.4, 0.625, and 0.375 multipliers. Arbitrary, or specific reasoning?
My proposal is that we create a new variable E, denoting how established the poster is on a scale of 1 - 2, with 1 being completely unknown, and 2 being an extremely established poster (exact definitions to be determined).
I am also curious how you can come up with an arbitrary metric for "establishing" a poster. Some variables I think that would be worthy of considering include: Account Age, Votes per Post, and Steem Earned per Post.
Great graph and chart! Admittedly the numbers were somewhat arbitrary (I merely took the original ratio between commenting and activity rewards, and did a +/- 0.2 with the original author reward). For me, the key is the point of the post, not any particular set formula. If some of the more important people ends up seeing this post, I'm sure there will be a great discussion about just exactly how to tweak the formula. It'll be much better than anything I can come up with.
In terms of what metrics to use for how "established" a poster is, I think Average votes per post could be important. I'm not sure if there should be a cut-off (i.e posts over a certain amount of time, say 2 months would not count) or not. Again, if we can spread this message and get some important people on board, we'll be able to have a great discussion on the specifics, and come up with something better than any single person would think of.
I think vote weight is more important than average vote per post. Obscurity on Steem comes from not having enough whales voting on your post.