I have always thought that flags in an effort to "balance the reward pool" were as destructive to good curation as votebots indiscriminately supporting content. It is a bit annoying to see a few users consistently getting big payouts, but it's also painful to see a post FINALLY get recognition only to have some self-righteous whale decide it's gained "too much." Meanwhile, spam and plagiarism erodes the reward pool far more destructively for the ecosystem and community.
In fact, financial manipulation and political machination are at least equally degrading, and IMHO, far more deeply impact the platform, and community.
The middle ground advocated by @rhondak is perhaps attainable, but practically impossible to conceive, much less to derive from extant conditions. I'm gonna hang in there for now, but I reckon holding my breath while my betters tilt at windmills is an irrational approach to Steemit.
The confluences of money, manufactured opinion, and power politics are complex, and the tools available to us to negotiate such rapids are in few hands today. I reckon luck will be as important to Steemit's survival and future as good intentions, understanding, and solid code.