- Author is rewarded only when/if curators upvoted the post
- Curation rewards are distributed between all curators who voted, so even at 75% share, curators are likely to get way less, then the author (per person, especially when many people voted)
Another example: an unknown musician created a song; but if nobody hears it, creator will not get anything. And then an established influencer comes and promises to promote it, but collect 90% of all earnings. What is the best course of action for the musician? Should they collect 100% from zero, or 10% from something?
Creators often have agents for that very reason. But an agent gets what, 15%? Even if it's 25%, assuming that's the industry going rate, I agree 75% of something is more than 100% of nothing. But still, an agent works for his fee. A curator who does nothing except literally click links of posts he never sees is essentially a parasite and could more economically be replaced by a bot. Some people do read posts and selectively curate properly -- I'm not talking about them at all.
25/75% curator/author like it is for the moment is pretty much fair BUT, I am thinking if that would change to 50/50 it may be possible that people would vote a lot more other peoples posts and steemit platform would grow a lot faster and be a stronger platform.because many users have difficulties to create good content because of their bad English. but until that is changed we can only guess if it would be better or not.