I appreciate and identify with your statement, "...I worry that some of my decent content and possibly future hard work will by passed over because a whale didn't get a fat $ next to my post."
I understand the theory about those who have been in the system longer having a larger say about payout, but I think the algorithm needs some adjustment. I see many posts by others which agree. I believe NO vote should have NOTHING of value to offer. ALL votes should have SOMETHING of value that would show . For example, at the time of this writing, your comment has four votes, including mine, but no monetary value. I have seen others with many, many more votes and no value. Perhaps every vote should have at least - I'll throw out an arbitrary number - 1/10th of a penny. Personally, I think if less than 10 (or maybe 25) people upvote a post, then maybe it is not worthy of reward. With the huge influx of material, 25 votes is becoming more and more difficult, and likely will be even more so as time goes on. After the first penny, then I can see the monetary value becoming more difficult to attain.

More and more people are coming into Steemit, more and more are posting. As it stands, if one does not get on a patriarch's "following" list or randomly found by a particularly good bot, many great posts gain no monetary value, even though hundreds of people upvote. When Steemit was much newer and fewer people were onboard, 25 votes, including at least one whale vote, were probably easy. However, if a post receives more than 10 (or 25) votes, regardless of whether a whale votes on it, it should be worth SOMETHING! I mean, good grief, so much is now on Steemit, if a post receives 25 votes, it should get AT LEAST A PENNY for the author's effort; and I would imagine, whales already have their favorites chosen for their bots. Therefore, getting the attention of a whale, at this point forward, is likely nonexistent.