I think a type of free market would evolve around the different percentages, but I don't think it would go to that far of an extreme throughout the entire community. Some bots may focus on higher % ratios and that's fine, but I imagine real people are going to reward content they appreciate regardless of the ratio.

Curation focused users would be encouraged to vote on high % curation reward posts (that they believe will be successful), but those posts would likely only be in situations where the author cared more about visibility than rewards.

After thinking about this for the last couple months - I'm leaning towards not just letting the basic user set this ratio while posting. Someone could of course make a utility to set the ratio to whatever they want - but the platforms themselves should be the ones determining these percents to simplify the process, and that's what most users will end up using.

Steemit.com for example could present it as an option while writing a post:

• Default (25% / 75%)
• Reduced Visibility (0% / 100%)
• More Visibility (50% / 50%)
• Highest Visibility (75% / 25%)

This could be a slider or whatever, potentially not even revealing the % ratio (to reduce cognitive load). Maybe they don't even give the user an option, but they change steemit.com so that comments are at 0/100% and posts at 50/50%, because that's what's best for steemit. I'm not sure what the exact numbers would be, just brainstorming.

Overall I don't think we'd end up in a situation where all posts required 80-90% curation rewards to get visibility. The way the websites are built would follow the market, and since most people use these websites, there's a bit of a safety net.

Also - once content has been silo'd (either through communities or chainBB forums) - the overall visibility from monetary gains is a lot less important.