Voted for 
  - No


I think @valued-customer and @krnel explained already very well, why they are against an increased curation reward. I agree with them.

I read the argument that other methods (vote selling, self-voting) would be much more profitable for (money) investors (don't forget that authors are also investors, <em>time</em> investors) than curating, thus curating should be made more attractive.
I just ask what a few times more profitable means if at the same time the STEEM value is more and more decreasing? I would love to earn <em>less</em> STEEM than now if only the STEEM value would increase again. And it will only increase if we manage to attract more users (who in the best case are contributing interesting content). Only then potential bigger investors (companies) could be sure to reach a big audience (for example when advetising their products).
It's hard enough for new users anyway: to create an account, have enough RC for upvoting and answering comments, earning any small amount with their posts. It would get even worse! And if then for example I would be one of the few upvoters of such a small new account I would get a big part of the author reward myself (as curation) instead to give it to the author ...

I really like to curate already NOW with only 25 % curation reward if I find good stuff (I don't care when I vote and who else did vote). I curate because I like what I see. I think the voting behavior of people who are curating this way wouldn't change much with higher curation reward. I guess only people who curate just for earning money, most of the time in an automated way (without reading what they curate) would be affected by this change.