My approach has always been posting, not curating
But you want others to vote for you?!!
Everyone should do some voting every day even if it is just for half an hour. Otherwise we end up with these rants from people who refuse to vote but are annoyed that the 33 whales who do vote haven't had time to get around to them...
Some of us whales are actually spending quite a bit to fund solutions to help with the problems on this beta level platform.
I understand the frustration, but steem gives power to people so they can change the balance over time by voting. I feel like its necessary to vote and it honestly feels like rok-sivante is just getting a bit frustrated and in the panic phase of this.
There are a lot of people on here that can't write well but still want to make some money so they go with the curation strategy... good for them. As I already explained, I don't have the time for that and my talents suit me better for creation. That's how I can contribute the most value per minute that I'm on here... also, I don't think Rok is complaining about not getting votes... and I sure as hell am not. I treat this as a hobby project in the background. My business is real estate development.
People vote for good content, not in return for good curation. That's why the founders tried to build in an incentive system that rewards curators, so that reciprocity in voting wouldn't be necessary.
Personally, I'm indifferent to how people should vote. They should do whatever their gut tells them IMO. I think ultimately that's what's going to drive the site anyway, and ultimately what will make it palatable for your average person.
While I think it's admirable that people like yourself want to be good curators for their vision of how the site should look, the gut reactions of people are ultimately what will determine the curation if and when this site gains mass adoption. People who won't or can't contribute desirable content (read most future users) will only come here if they see what they want to see, nothing more, nothing less, regardless of how any of us here now feel about that.
"SHOULD" is the word in the idealism here that sways the whole outlook.
not everyone has the same talents/values to contribute. not everyone chooses to contribute the same type of value.
(and maybe there's another point of hypocriticism highlighted from my own case, having some unconscious presupposition that the site's dynamics and people on it "should" be different than what they are.)
...
and thanks, @officialfuzzy for the input. short, but appreciated. (and is more disillusionment than panic. :-) )