Toss a Coin - Head or Tail?

There is a fine line between a creative and sensitive mind and losing one’s mind.

The same applies to what is regarded as normal behaviour and what is seen as abnormal. This always depends on the community you find yourself in and the people around you.

Today I’m thinking about giving up on commenting or posting or both
What’s the point of investing so many hours in reading and leaving comments? The vast majority don’t respond, and I come across this everywhere on this platform. The fact that there’s no reward makes it no easier, and that’s something I’ve been struggling with particularly this month. This is also the downside of not working as part of a single team with a common theme.

Upvoting takes considerably more time – more than a day, in fact. And with every vote, I ask myself whether this person actually deserves it, and I often find myself thinking: what’s the point? Why should I support this person, someone who invests so little in supporting others, the platform and who will hardly ever – and most likely never – leave a comment on anyone else’s post? And what to think about all those never upvoting someone else, giving all their SP to a bot or upvote service? Should they be rewarded? If so, why? Just because they post? It sounds to me this selfish act shouldn't be rewarded, after all from Steem Curators is also expected they vote many different accounts.

Both the posts and the comments involve work, and for some people, this involves a great deal of effort. They don’t just get away with a quick, half-hearted effort. Strangely enough, when it comes down to it, they receive fewer votes than anyone else. How is that possible?

Why are so many creative communities missing from the lists that curators use? How is it that so many from Europe, the Western world, simply don’t exist for most curators?
Am I still acting fair if I have to weigh everything up before casting a vote, do I still have to give votes to people from countries – regardless of whether they’re good or not – who have their own curators from whom they can receive a vote?
Every vote I cast comes at the expense of someone else; that’s just how it is.
Am I the only one who worries about this, among the other curators? Why am I so eager to give every vote to someone else, rather than just to those who are genuinely good? Wouldn’t that be more fair?

Why is it I give as many people as possible an upvote, on average those with lower SP, whilst also distributing the votes evenly between posts and comments?

I’ve got a long list of links – all creators I think deserve a vote – and there aren’t that many votes to give. To my opinion that exactly should be the extra of giving that booming vote. A big vote for a change, not 15% of.... to just spread the name or voting those you hope they will vote you once they are SC.

Should I then toss a coin or play ‘Eeny, meeny, miny, moe’ when it comes to deciding who gets the upvote?

I know that if I treated others the way they treat me, upvoting would be a lot easier… I’d be done after ten clicks. Ten clicks in 30 seconds (let’s make that a minute to leave the standard comment as well) – that would be all the work involved in a day as a curator.

_{13.10.26
INKtober prompts: toss + flimsy}