The solution is to build a new paradigm that will fix the fundamental issues with Steem, being:

1. Plutocracies have always failed social networks of any kind.
2. Investors and content creators have contradicting interests that are not being served by the same system.

I get it, none of us have had the vision to come up with a solution just yet, so meanwhile might as well try some quick fixes and see how things go. I'm on board with all of that. I'm just raising some questions that may help optimise said quick fixes.

Also, some clarifications are in order. In the past I've invested heavily in Steem. When everyone was exclaiming doom and gloom when Dan left, I bought hundreds of thousands of Steem. I always had significant liquid Steem, but for the longest time, I was also significantly powered up across 6 or 7 accounts (since you're snooping around, feel free to check @liberosist, @meerkat, @dunia etc.). While powered up, I used all of my stake to exclusively support curation initiatives. I can understand why you'd think I have an ulterior motive, and I won't call it libellous, but I've contributed significantly to Steem through 2016-17 and I'd urge you to believe me that I still have the best interests of Steem at heart.

To be transparent, I powered down and sold a lot during the bull run, but you should not assume that just because I am not powered up that I'm not a Steem investor. I started buying back once the market had settled, and I bought some more Steem as recently as a week ago. All I'll say is, I'm a significant investor of Steem, and the best interests of Steem are in my best interest. But the price isn't my concern here. A bull market will come around, and STEEM will gain significantly as usual. Doesn't really mean Steem will become a better social network.

PS: I'll absolutely power up when the two fundamental issues I list above are even partially solved.