It's a good point that the hope that manual curation would increase is most likely misplaced. Your argument that manual curators with large upvotes would quite simply not have time to do that. That's why the distribution bot @ocdb is such a great thing. What it does is speed up the process by which stake distribution improves with the secondary benefit of improving the average quality of content. @nonsowrites suggested that instead of the reward system change, Steemit Inc should consider delegating more to communities where distribution takes place in a natural manner. That actually makes much more sense than any kind of tweaking of the reward distribution. It was such a shame that Musing and DSound lost their delegation. DSound in particular was a pretty awesome community. Ned said he pulled the delegation from DSound because he hadn't heard about it, which was a pretty arrogant move, as he should've considered choosing the cuts from a wider point of view. I'm glad that he's no longer CEO at Steemit Inc.

The argument has been put forward that 50/50 curation has yielded good results on smoke.io. Maybe. But how big is smoke.io? Could it be that manual curation actually works better on very small platforms despite a possibly very top heavy stake distribution? Maybe Steem is already too large for manual curation to work without delegations to communities.

Then again, maybe this change will not make a big difference - one way or another. I