RE: Yet Another Post Regarding Unfair Payouts, But This Is A Proposal, Not A Rant
It is indeed logical to say that those with higher reputation have proven themselves as top content creators on Steem; while high SP holding has more to do with mining skills and being early having the foresight before everyone else (or being an employee of Steemit Inc). The content creator's skills would seem more suitable for curation than the miner's. On the other hand, content creators may be at odds with the audience, curating content that may be too esoteric for the masses.
Of course, a few people have powered up a lot, and being able to influence the curation on the site is a motivating factor too. But currently I presume the SP holding for early miners versus organic power ups is still heavily lopsided. This will change, I'm sure, but could take a while.
Dan has hinted about addressing this issue several times, let's wait and see what they have on the roadmap.
You have made some interesting observations, but I still believe a "few will always hold most" into the future, and will always influence the curation process. This could be countered by "reputation" rather then having it just sit there like a trophy, by finding a way to link rep to your voting weight on a post. I do believe we shall have a more level playing field if rep is somehow included in the equation, and not make it a "money" only space.
True, but then the argument would be - why would anyone power up? Already the interest in negligible. If their SP holding matters less on voting, and thus lower curation rewards (which are tied to Rshares), why would they power up?
I am not suggesting that influence of SP be done away with altogether, it just needs to be "salted" with something like reputation, or something not monetary. This would help in adoption of this platform as a "social" site, which is not happening at the pace an idea like this deserves, even in beta!