From my perspective, however, this is quite easy to explain. There is a curator who has supposedly identified which people provide the best content. In the end, it's no longer about the blog post, but about who this blog post comes from. This leads to the same names appearing frequently in the featured lists. Some names I read there every day, sometimes multiple times. The votes on these posts are to a large extent not organic. I.e. the above happened. A person has been identified who is being curated. Because of this consistent curation, it is probably lucrative for people who take profit optimization as a criterion for their activity to curate these people as well. Because you can statistically count on the fact that the contribution constantly receives corresponding votes and the own curator reward is therefore constantly good. Then there is the fact that only a limited number of upvotes can be awarded - at some point the daily capacity is reached. This means that once you have identified such a group and then stay with it, there is not much room for new things. Please correct me if I have a mistake in thinking here.

It was pointed out to me a few months ago that my Curatin APY could be optimized and that I should be careful to upvote "more prominent" authors on Hive and not small comments that don't generate appropriate curation rewads. Absolutely understandable from a profit optimization perspective, probably counterproductive in terms of promoting good content.

But well, since I keep upvoting comments and posts regardless of what a potential curation reward will be, I guess I'll have to live with my 1.9% curation APR.

Posted Using LeoFinance ^Beta