I propose giving additional weight to curator rewards when a user is evaluating relatively “Unsorted” posts and authors. Specifically, metrics such as the number of votes on current and previous posts or dollar amount earned on last N posts would suffice to measure the current quality of information curators have provided regarding a specific post or author.
I like the idea in theory, except the number of votes part, which is a near-useless metric to Steem when someone could possibly control thousands of sockpuppet/botnet accounts. Past value of posts would be a better single indicator. You also mention account reputation but that is a Steemit.com thing and not a Steem thing.
The issues I see would be: is the extra complexity in curation reward calculation worth it? How much of a bonus should there be? Too little and the whole scheme is a waste of time, too much and there may be abuse avenues.
@pfunk Thank you so much for taking the time to provide your valuable input on the proposal. I have adjusted the post to reflect your suggestions regarding unrelated and ineffective variables. I agree using a simple SBD earned per post avg could be sufficient.
In response to your second point the complexity of including one additional variable is incomprehensibly insignficant compared the growth from a properly curated repository.
We "$STEEM holders" are essentially paying curators for a service. Assuring we are spending that efficiently and prudently is always "worth it". Spending the curation funds on services that grow the value of the repository and in turn the improve the value of website, blockchain, and tokens, is the purpose of the reward.
I may be wrong and this is technically insane or unfeasible but I think @dantheman would know the answer to this one best, maybe he can chime in?