Voted for
- No
Voting shouldn't be called curation. It's a misleading term. Curation means that experts help other people discover good content, preferably by creating a coherent collection for a certain theme or genre.
Resteeming is a form of curation, but it isn't rewarded. Voting is expressing your own preference, and extending the arts metaphor, it's comparable to buying a ticket for an exhibition or concert. Upvoting posts you like (including your own) should be enough of a reward.
A high reward for voting means that whales who don't post often stay rich, while poor bloggers stay poor, no matter how active they are. It also encourages buying and selling votes, because the voting bots get part of the money back as rewards.
Participation in the network is rewarded by rewarding authors and commenters. It would be better if voting would cost money, like supporting content in the real world does.
Voting does indirectly cost money. The rewards pool used for voting content comes from increasing the supply of Steem, which puts pressure on lowering the price of Steem (inflation). To cover the cost of inflation requires self-voting. Every vote for someone else is distributing coins to someone else which is like paying. The purpose of voting is to reward content that adds value to the platform. This is a community effort.