Quite informative, and most of my genuine doubts are cleared now.
However....I need further clarification on this.
Post age matters when you cast your vote but also if it has a lot of vote strength behind it that was cast on the first day. This shouldn't discourage you from still voting on old posts you find you want to reward, especially if they have close to no votes on the posts when you're about to curate them.
Suppose there is a post that no one has voted yet, at the end of the 4th day, if a curator votes it, does he lose the proportionate curation reward on the 4th day, as you said previously the curation reward stands to deplete proportionately if the curated after 24 hrs. So in this particular example, can you tell how would it affect it if no one has curated a particular post at the end of 4th day? (not in the context of the position of voting but rather what would be loss on account of timing of voting, beyond 24 hours).
Thank you so much.
No, if there are no votes or tiny/very small ones compared to yours you lose next to nothing in that case and if there are literally no votes you lose nothing in return no matter what day (unless you vote in the 12h before payout window, there you get penalized each hour leading up to payout, i.e. 75% at 9 hours before payout, 50% at 6 hours and 100% at ~a few seconds before payout)
Alright. Thanks for the clarification.
In my opinion, it's better to vote comments, comment voting seems to be more organic for obvious reasons, and automated votes are mostly concentrated in posts.
From another angle, post-curation is just a culmination of the overall social activities of a user. So outrightly calling it automated would be unfair.
In any case, the current reward curve looks better and more equitable.