@snowflake thank you very much for replying here along with upvoting the post and voting for me as a witness! I love that you started the upvotes after the most I made :)
You have made a powerful point that I agree with in that investors need good motivation to hold Steem Power and be active here. It will not matter what authors contribute if too many investors pull out and dump Steem because of an inability to earn a good return. I know as an investor with my life savings here I feel I have a right to get a return also. Curation currently does pay but not nearly as well as posts or upvoting ourselves.
The question is how do we both ensure authors and investors both have a way to share in the rewards that most of us are happy with? Currently it is not simple or easy for either. Authors struggle to get started while authors at the top are consistently rewarded. Investors not posting or wanting to spend hours reading articles each day to decide where to give the very powerful upvotes have few options to get a good return in both time and money while investors setting up systems to guarantee a return often are earning a lot from auto upvoting posts accepted by curation guilds to upvoting authors that consistently earn a lot from posts to accepting a portion of the upvote back as a thank you.
How do we make it easier for investors and authors to help each other in a way that readers enjoy the most?
I appreciate your reply here especially because writing this post with you as both a top witness upvoter and the upvoter featured in the comment felt like walking a tightrope. I am very relieved to read your reply and am grateful for your kind feedback here!
I think we should go back to a 50/50 model. Currently it is 75% authors 25% curators but used to be 50/50 which was better imo.
According to this rule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1%25_rule_(Internet_culture) only 1% of users actively create content, so why should the 1% authors receive more than the 99% lurkers?
Someone was saying recently that there is too many authors compared to readers on steemit. I believe a 50/50 could rebalance this ratio a bit. It's important that we have engaged users that actually read content..
"so why should the 1% authors receive more than the 99% lurkers?"
Well, the obvious answer is 1 author provides more value than 99 lurkers. Or 999 lurkers. Or 9 million lurkers. Lurkers are useless.
Curators are not lurkers, they are hard workers who can't be differentiated from lurkers by 99.9% of us other than by stalking the steemd page and looking for votes.
I'm defining lurker as non-author who doesn't vote.
I fully agree that curation should be more rewarding, but perhaps something between 25% and 50% would help. Maybe a small portion of the pool each day could be set aside as a boost to curation payouts. Perhaps the formula itself needs changing.
This jerrybanfield post is the first time I'm seeing your comments. Great curation efforts!
I'll be following you now.
Thank you for your support!
I am also agree with the 50/50 but then you also should re-think the VP curve ... The people should have the possibilitty to vote more often ... In general people vote less now and they tend to go to authors who always get good rewards... I know everybody is not here for the money but the majority part are...
With the equality update it does seem like an adjustment to increase curation would be helpful!