Is it easier to like a funny picture than upvote some valuable information?

I argue that the nature of the topic in question determines how we percieve the up- and downvote buttons. That in turn determines how easily we press the buttons. This might influence the direction in which steem will evolve.

How I percieve the buttons in different contexts

Nature of post -> perception of upvote / perception of downvote* (what is the threshold of voting)

• Funny pictures -> Funny yeah / Please don't waste peoples' time with pictures like this
• Interesting phenomenon -> It was indeed interesting / Everyone knows that so don't waste peoples time
• Negative news -> Not nice but I think everyone should see this / I wish I hadn't seen this
• Positive news -> More of this kind / Who cares
• ELI5 or guide -> Everyone must read this / False information, no-one should follow this guide
• Discussion about controversial topic -> I enjoyed the argument / Annoying people here, don't enter
• Question -> I've been wondering about this too / Don't ask questions
• Answer to question -> Absolutely awesome question / Who cares about your opinnion

The main point here is that the perception dictates when and how easily I actually vote. In case of a funny picture, it's very easy to upvote, while in case of a good answer to a question it's not. In case of someone posting some negative news, the voting doesn't really work. The bad news and the good answer might be very valuable in terms of money, but some cute puppy might generate 25 x more money just because it's easier to press the upvote button.

So what does this matter

The community here is still very small and doesn't represent the whole target audience. Compared to them we are more inclined towards technology, philosophy, finance and consipiracy-theories but still you can see that we valuate a funny picture higher than many well argumented answers or valuable proposals. I don't think this actually represents what we consider valuable, and this is because of the context-related perception of the voting buttons. When the big masses come the picture will be skewed much more. People will earn much more money by providing something funny rather than valuable. I'm not worried about someone making money by making others a little happier - that's one form of value too - but I think it's bad that the incentive to provide valuable answers to peoples questions will be relatively low.

My small proposal

Lets have three buttons with the following meanings: I enjoyed this, This was valuable, thank you and Worthless. The buttons would apply different weights on voting: 20%, 100% and -100% respectively. The easily pressed button would apply little weight, and let the user like 100 times a day, while the heavy button would allow 20 votes. This would help steem evolve naturally into a forum where quality content is rewarded and thus powerfully incentivised. I guess people looking for quality content are the ones who would bring money into the system. This would require no change to steem, but only in the front-ends. By making small adjustments to the relative weights of the voting buttons, the balance between quality content and entertainment could be adjusted.

Another solution could be to find a good proxy measure on how valuable the content is to the reader. For example if a user bookmarks a post or answer, it is most likely very valuable - so a 100% vote could be added. Sharing likely indicates more entertainment than value, so that could add a 20% vote.

What do you think? Does your voting behaviour depend on the context? Will this determine in which direction steem will evolve content-wise?