It’s obvious anyone can just maximize curation by just voting on whatever content that gets the votes. Has less to do with content and accounts under the current Steem econs. The fact that app X is giving so much better returns than the rest is already saying that it’s the voter, not actually the content or account. Why would I just hunt for high curation returns just because something I don’t care about is giving high returns? It doesn’t make sense. Plus the under linear econs, delegated SP voters can just abuse it themselves without having anything to do with curation.

Why should an SP investor returns be subject under such terms? I'm getting low returns because I'm just voting without curation rewards in mind as the econs isn't exactly forcing any real curation to go on. I would've already gone to maximize my returns pumping my votes on stuff I don't care about, but give good returns. It's easy just to look at the chain and frontrun all the repeated votes.

Anyway, sooner or later I hope many more will wake up to the fact that the situation isn’t working out. Average of 50% returns for every vote given out is the sweet spot for the SP investor. The main point is to make SP desirable. Increased curation rewards, increased downvote incentives, move a little away from linear so delegated SP to apps still work but they need to curate better and bid bots become a more risky venture.

Not putting down on the good work you're trying to do here, but sorry to say but this isn’t actually solving any problems other than telling those who don’t care about anything else other than returns to just follow where the money is. I can just follow your suggestion as well and get my better returns right away, but the problem is still in the econs that isn't helping Steem. Hopefully SMTs will solve it all, but I kinda doubt it..