I think the best thing to do is a mix, aim to maximize rewards while minimizing trading or scheming.

I agree and I think that the way "maximization" happens matters. If I can get more by adding value to the community, why would I scheme - for most people, this would be the case. I think a lot of small accounts especially would benefit more through honest participation than trying to maximize their own stake.

The one thing interesting about curation is unlike posting, it scales better. For example, by posting twice as often you probably aren't going to double your posting rewards, but by doubling your HP, you are likely to earn double your curation rewards

For sure.Through participation, it adds up fast, especially if adding a bit of value along the way.

Another interesting thing is if the value of Hive increases a lot, your curation rewards increase directly proportionate, however, your author rewards won't. This is a little less obvious, but the main idea is a lot of people start shitposting when Hive is worth a lot, so there are more people to share the rewards with. Also, curators tend to reduce the amount of vote per post thinking 50 cents or whatever their vote is worth is enough. So it's way more sustainable (and easier if you don't care).

I am glad that this idea is spreading - I have been hammering it for 3 years now :D

Curation is a gamechanger but because people are short-sighted, they don't see the future of it