I intentionally used "make profit" to make it easier, but actually it's compensate loss from inflation. SP holders who don't curate are losing about 8% annually, but if they curate, it will decrease to around 4~6%.
Meanwhile, STEEM holders are losing 9.5% a year, since they don't get 15% of inflation reward. Merely removing curation reward keeps the difference (15%) same, but if we change curation reward to inflation reward, the difference will become around 33%.
Details can differ, but I think the core idea is the same, as I mentioned in my last sentence. Voting is not free lunch.
financially speaking, the 3% difference is just too small to justified the time and effort invested.
IMO, the psychological satisfaction sometimes weight much more to a curator than any financial rewards.
and I'm agree with @snowflake in his point that, the increase in platform-quality and thus the value of SP could eventually benefits SP-holders more.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I agree. I am just playing devil's advocate. You can find that I already suggested this argument last month and got a huge backlash.
But there's no significant efforts and time if one is using bots.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Exactly.... that's the main reason why curation reward should be removed.
curator who don't use bot will probably get much less than 1%, so the curation reward is actually penalizing those who perform good curation manually.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I agree with most of your comment but I don't think this conclusion is certain:
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit