They aren't asking for any demonstration because there is no testing or scoring for such a demonstration, the only way to get data, the. Only. Way. Is to try it.
Curation isn't what you make it out to be by far, it's another word for saying review / rate. That's it. It's not about correct or incorrect ordering, it's about "I rate this as x dollars". After all let's not kid ourselves that we are curators at a natural history museum or the like...
What this proposal is about is not "fixing curation" but incentivizing policing the network, making it not profitable to self vote, bid bot, or circle jerk, make it cost little to nothing to counter plagiarism / fraud etc..
You're asking for some level of evidence that this proposal is going to make users more likely to rank a set of posts in a correct order but the preposterous notion isn't only that this proposal is not about that or that there aren't any metrics to measure "a correct order to user preference" (kinda oxymoron, as preference and correct are contradictory ideas, one is objective t/f and binary correct or incorrect, the other is subjective and variable) but that there isn't any place or system that could be used to determine that besides steem.
My argument is not that rules don't matter, I'm saying that having rules without enforcement is redundant, and putting it into code only burdens everyone, much like your suggestion, while those that seek the least amount of work for the most profit will exploit it either way, if they have to go around the obstacles you place they will. By allowing people to enforce rules that needent be even expressed or explained but are simply "unwritten" (ie George Carlin's unwritten rules of the road) then you don't have to deal with figuring out exactly who is who as they are going around your obstacles. I hope it makes sense, I'm sure there are others who could better explain the conundrum.
Posted using Partiko Android
The point of a content curation system is to produce a ranked list of content. Yes, from the voter's perspective, it's just "I rank this as x dollars", but a good content curation system will aggregate all of those individual decisions into an ordered set that approximates the actual combined preferences of the users so that readers can quickly find things of interest.
In that context, it is possible to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of a particular voting scheme before injecting it into the blockchain.
You should read A Puff of Steem: Security Analysis of Decentralized Content Curation. There is much to learn, and it suggests several techniques by which the strengths and weakness of any proposal might be quantified before slapping it into the running block chain.
It's very simple to calculate. What is the Median power of an average voter? What is the power of a community vote? Of a bid-bot? Of a whale?
Case closed :D