Not a developer, but please take my idea

Curator coin and creator coin.

Now that we live in a Steem environment of many token experiments, I wonder if there's space for what I FEEL is the right way to have a token ecosystem.

Paired coins, which we'll call CU and CR for the nonce.

CU is stake-able and has a very long unstake time, let's say a year...or maybe it's not unstakeable AT ALL. When you upvote something with CU, the author is paid out in CR You receive some CU curation rewards, but none for the value of your own vote, only for the votes that follow. These are paid out in unstaked CU, and I leave the math of how much to your own thought experiments CU cannot be delegated. VP is never wasted. (Think DTC's system)

CR is not stake-able. Holding it trends your posts on whatever platform. (i.e. the author with the most CR held will have their most recent post that isn't past payout at the top of the trending page. Then the author with the second most, and so on.) That and selling it are its only purposes. So, in theory, the artists who had been upvoted by curators the most and held their CR would appear at the highest points. When someone cashed out, their visibility would drop.

Even within a feed, the order of the posts would cycle through the people you were following who held the most CR.

I dunno. Other ideas? The promise of the premise of, "I reward creators I like with my votes" seems unfulfilled by Steem. It has become a platform for development, fine. But I still think that's the most attractive premise, and indeed, looking at @nonameslefttouse's recent pitch for WHY you should get steem, it seems like it's still attractive to others. The functionality of the coin, as it stands, and even worse, as it's proposed to change, seem to undercut that premise. By locking both functions in one coin, we get bidbots and such. I dunno if this would solve that problem, because, well, a complex economic system will probably develop some sort of bad behavior, but it seems like it could.

Maybe a functionality whereby CR gradually disappears? Incentivize holding it to trend, but mildly disincentivize holding it if it could be abused? No, what's the purpose of that? I guess, in this system, people could still pay bidbots who held CU to upvote them and gain CR to resell... but I feel like the economics of that would be nonsense. Delegating isn't possible, so the bidbot would have to take on real risk. The staking period is long, so there would be real risk there. And the only way it'd be profitable is if CR had a high value, which would then fall if the purpose of CR were useless.

I dunno.

Anyways. Please contribute your ideas. I feel like there's something here. And I'd ask folks with experience in development AND economics to weigh in. @josephsavage @holger80 (others, please, but that's who I'm tagging because I know they do)