I'm not going to talk about me, at least not directly. I think there are certain types of content that are undervalued. Among them, my main interest, which is poetry. I don't think it's a problem of Hive in particular, but something broader, cultural or social. It's a long-standing paradox: poets have a high cultural valuation, but few economic incentives. At least in my country, Argentina, which is what I know (but I don't think it's much different elsewhere) poets (even those who are already quite renowned, with some exceptions) have to pay to edit their books (because, in fact, very few buy them), do free poetry recitals, free magazines, and so on. In Hive poetry does not win many votes either. There are well paid poems, but they are usually from users who have upvotes because the curators follow them from other communities. Of course there are curators who vote for poetry, but they are the fewest. For example, the full upvote on the account of the community that, I believe, is the largest and most active poetry community (Blockchain Poets) is only $0.09. I think that another thing that plays against us is that to get upvotes is generally not enough with quality content, but you have to do some personal marketing and social relations, which are things in which poets, usually, and again generalizing, we are very bad. I think the same thing must happen in other fields (in literary prose, to a lesser extent; in philosophy, etc.). There are some initiatives (like the recent one that rewards the author of the week in the community I mentioned; or also the ocd incubator in some literature communities in general) that come to improve the situation, but a little attention from some whales would come in handy to these communities or niches that, for whatever reason, generate quality posts (not all of course, there is also low quality poetry), but very few economic rewards. Thank you!
[Translated with Deepl]