RE: Multi-Tiered Curation Idea
That's not what I said at all, nice try twisting "curation on here isn't what museum and gallery curators do, curation on here is simply rating/reviewing/giving opinions on items" into "cURaTiOn reWaRdS aRe BaD mkaay". Your nonsense theories that people will invest money to reward others in the hopes that others will do the same and buy in to reward others exclusively also are as idiotic and removed from reality as they get. I defy anyone to fathom something more fantastic than that, that investors will lock in stake without curation rewards or any other return besides the hopes that it will increase demand for the tokens, which is as idiotic nonsensical as it gets. It's no wonder why no one has done such a thing in the entire history of mankind, because it's idiotic.
Reddit, Fakebook, Insta, and so on, so forth. All these places feature actual curation without any financial reward. You here confuse investing and ROI as somehow being only possible via curation rewards, and completely fail to grasp that since long before history began investors relied on capital gains for ROI. Despite no rewards existing on legacy social media, it is provable that people curate on those platforms, and flock to them to post despite no author rewards existing either.
Steem potentiates financial returns from using social media, and gaining author rewards depends neither on curation rewards, which demonstrably discourage actual curation in favor of profiteering due to financial incentive, or stake weighting, which again encourages profiteering rather than content creation.
Your inability to grasp factual reality consistently produces hilarity. I am always entertained when I bother to read your drivel. It further allows my pointing out said factual reality to be contrasted by the example of absurdity you provide.
Thanks again!