Well Spoken, as usual Stellabelle!
I guess we have to disconnect ourselves from people who are looking at Steem as an investment and only care about the ROI. At this point, short of a hardfork that changes the reward system, you can't stop them from doing as they see fit.
But YOU will always be looked on with much greater respect for the way you do things. How people view you is important to you, as you say, way moreso than your ROI. This makes you an advocate for the community, all of the community. There are too few people who walk the same path as you.
I guess that I can somewhat see the flip side as well. While I am out curating new authors, I see so much crap posting that it makes me want to cry sometimes. It's surely not as bad as Facebook, but it isn't good. I can spend hours, even days, trying to find just one post that can be curated for new author rewards. It is disheartening.
Unfortunately, right now, Steem does not have a real good way for the cream to rise to the top. And I am not sure how you change that, other than by following the lead of people we respect. There's a handful of people who have been here for over a year who I can genuinely say are doing it right. So I attempt to follow their lead, and do the best I can.
There is a pragmatic side to me that understands what snowflake and people like him are doing, but I feel the same disgust at that mentality as overkillcoin. If this is just an investment, go invest in a different alt coin and leave the reward pool to the people who genuinely care about the platform.
Keep on Mining for people who don't Suck! You do a great job! ;-)
thanks. I realize that @snowflake gave his solution at the end, and he pointed it out that i overreacted...which i did. I think it was good of him to wake us up....i think it's worth looking into getting the reward percentages adjusted....back to 50/50.
I'm not so sure. Given the current goings-on on Steemit, I think the most likely scenario will be that:
I don't think increasing the curator's cut will increase proper curating, it will just increase the rewards for those who vote for rewards only rather than for rewarding content they like.
I suspect all it would do is make the in-crowds and short-term ROI-seekers work slightly differently, while at the same time increasing the income of those who vote for profit and decreasing the rewards for content creators.
The long-term/short-term outlook of those with the big wallets is key here, not the percentages.
There's only one way to find out what would happen, so we could just try it, as long as it can be reversed when it doesn't work as intended. Nothing wrong with experimenting as long as you say beforehand what you will do with the outcome of the experiment.