You have shared many suggestions from your point of view, and I think several of them are positive. However, I feel there should be some flexibility in a few areas. Everyone here wants to grow, and I think that should be appreciated. The rules can be strict and positive at the same time, but we should also be careful not to make them too strict.

I agree with you that curators should change from time to time. I also think the curator selection rules should be reviewed and adjusted occasionally, just as we are seeing some changes now. This can give more users a chance to become curators and bring new perspectives to the teams.

However, I think a 10% vote limit for newcomers is a little too low. New users can be more sensitive in the beginning, and if they do not receive enough support at the start, there is a chance they may become demotivated. Newcomers are already unlikely to receive large votes unless their posts are really good. Also, with the current low price of STEEM, reducing their vote even further may not be the best solution.

I also have a different opinion about the three curator categories. If the requirements are set at such high levels, I think the same small group of users may get the opportunity to curate repeatedly. Users with around 10–15K SP and 70+ reputation should also have a chance. This could help us discover good curators among newer or less experienced users, while also giving them an opportunity to grow their reputation.

Regarding the one-year waiting period after powering down, I feel that one year is quite a long time. Sometimes people may need to power down because of an emergency or an unexpected situation. If they later return and meet the other requirements, I think they should be allowed to apply again after a reasonable waiting period rather than being excluded for a full year.

I would also like to understand the reasoning behind the rule that curators must not vote for or select users from their own country.

In my opinion, a curator can sometimes understand their own country's users and content better. They may know the local language, culture, and community, and they may also have a better idea about which users are genuinely active and which accounts may not be genuine. An outside curator may not always have that same understanding. Language can also be a factor. Of course, we can use translation tools, but translations are not always completely accurate, especially when someone is expressing personal experiences or using local expressions.

Instead of completely preventing curators from selecting users from their own country, perhaps there could be a balanced rule. For example, if a curator can select three posts per week, they could be allowed to select only one post from their own country and the other two from different countries. Or, even better, the three selected posts could come from three different countries.

I think this could maintain fairness and diversity while still allowing curators to use their knowledge of their own local community.

These are just my thoughts. I believe the best system would be one that maintains fairness and accountability while still giving more users a reasonable opportunity to grow.

#s34engagement