Came back to read your proposal again.

I want to challenge your idea. What if you think that "innovation" means that something is not yet present, it's not on the Internet, because it's so unusual that nobody talks about it? You suggest that topics that are already trendy are discussed. That is basically an adjustment to the already dominant situation. However, the majority is not representative of dissent. Your idea seems to be based on the mainstream, while I suggest looking at side streams/no streams. ;-)

As far as you consider Steemit, for example, as a space in which to thematize what is already being thematized, outside and inside, the same thoughts are rolled over and over again in different intensities, colors, and forms. Yet they are the same thoughts. I have now deliberately exaggerated to make my point.

After your procedure, I think, no theme would ever manage to achieve a lively participation that is not already sailing on the upwind. If you try to look at the search engine the other way round, what do you see?

I see that a search engine can only be used for what is already there. But it is completely useless to want to find something that is not yet there. Any knowledge excludes "not knowing" in this way. Someone then has to put something in from outside for it to gain digital visibility. Wikipedia tries to meet that "issue".

Unknown/innovative things always come about through marginal topics, never thought of before. Or so buried in the past that it fell into oblivion.

For me your thought looks like an algorithm similar to amazon or youtube algo, after products and topics are suggested to me based on my preference. I basically like that. However, I like to be irritated by ideas that I don't yet know exactly how to assess, that have an experimental character.

Question: how do you want to code intelligence into the blockchain? I didn't understand that.

In fact, I would suggest reducing the attention of contributions to digital space, bouncing posts off a wall that orientate themselves in tonality, taste, and presentation to what already exists. I don't exclude myself. I suppose my own postings, when it comes up, are mostly ordinary up to a little off track. If I choose the pearls from my blog history, perhaps a very small number would come about. .... Which brings me to the thought that the past postings come much too short. ... I'd be interested to know if there's anything you could do with this.

So we seem to understand each other in the basic idea, since I suspect what you mean by "the best of the best" also corresponds to what I consider to be something good. However, I'm assuming that any publishing of content is basically pointless if it's a means and an end at the same time. Like beating time.

In my view, the best content creators are the Buddhist monks who give weekly lectures to a small audience. Rarely have I felt so inspired. In fact, a Buddhist monk would never take part in such a competition. LOL :D