Every member here who has earned rewards for their content did so because there was an incentive for curators to hit the "like" button.
This is entirely untrue. There are many users who hit the "like" button simply because they like the content and want it to receive rewards. If everyone who was currently clicking the button because of the financial incentive stopped - the same rewards would be distributed to the community. It would just be decided by a different set of users hitting the like button.
So I guess in that case the incentive to hit the like button was because the person liked the content. The rewards are an added incentive and there's nothing wrong with that.
Either way, nobody here gets paid without first giving someone the incentive to vote.
Sorry, but not true if I am understanding you correctly. If nobody was incentivized to vote through curation rewards - people would still vote. I vote all the time, and it has nothing to do with any potential curation rewards.
The amount that the rewards pool will pay out each day is the same regardless of how many people vote. Whoever votes that day are the ones that decide where it goes. It would still all get paid out absent curation rewards.
I vote as much as possible, for only the things I like, provided I see them. Have a look at youtube though, and you'll see how the upvote button gets neglected. Read much of what I said here already. No offense, and with all due respect, kind sir, but I do not feel like talking in circles.
I see how this system works. I see the abusive aspect, and I see the bright side. I'm down the middle. Where I stand, I feel it's best to tackle ways to avoid the wrong and encourage the right while giving curation rewards a chance to breathe and function as intended. Those rewards, if marketed properly and truthfully, could be a great incentive to draw people to the platform. Find a way to reward them for actually engaging, rather than playing the numbers game.
Let's agree to end on that. I agree :)