Because the system works as you describe it, I agree with what you've said here and I'll probably take your advice to a large degree.
I would like to point out that this post does reveal what I think is a weakness in the Steemit platform. Weaknesses are fine (and inevitable) when taken as opportunities to improve.
My point is that it isn't good for content curation that there are motives to interact that aren't based purely on the quality of the content, but that are based (to a certain degree) on making money .
Take YouTube for example. Because no one gets anything for liking a post or comment, you know the likes are 100% "real" and that they were only given because a person truly wanted to give the like. That helps the best content and best comments rise to the top. Here, on Steemit, that is not the case (the motives are not 100% pure at all times) which I think is an area that needs improvement.
Do I know how to improve it? No. Maybe in time I might have some ideas, but I'm not sure they'll be good. But if anyone can figure out how we can make the motives for action remain while also making them more pure, I think it will help us improve the platform, which will also help us all make more money! :)
Yeah this really has to be addressed in the future or Steemit will never rise to the top. Its acutally a quite big problem I feel