Sort:  

Agree, hence why I don't do it often cause to newcomers at it can be pretty confusing. I remember a "newbie" who I had referred to using steemstats.com while steeming, she was pretty surprised seeing over 80 votes appear lasting over 5 minutes on her screen. :P

Plus comments are usually opinionated so if you curation-trail vote someone up it might seem like you are ganging up on the person disagreeing with the one getting voted, lol.

Oh and in case you are looking for someone new to follow, let me shamelessly advertise some info about my curation trail and manual voting activity from steemdb. :)

Oh, ok, I agree with you, it is very frustrating to see this behavior because it makes an echo chamber that excludes the random chance that I could get voted by these people if they did voting themselves.

Don't get me wrong again. I think curation trails are very valuable. They make it far more likely that good content creators will get noticed and rewarded. And of course they help ensure good curators get rewarded too. I just think curation trails should apply to upvoting ONLY (not flagging). And upvoting main posts ONLY (not comments).

I disagree that curation trails upvote 'good' content, that is entirely subjective, and as random as our users.
Most of the curation trails I have seen seek rewards on the vote.
Who follows a 'bad' curator that doesn't receive rewards, or votes 'bad' content?
If 'good' content was the goal it would require that each upvote be the result of each post being voted by each curator.
What two different people perceive as good is rarely the same.
I shut down my steemvoter because it ate up too much vote weight voting posts I wouldn't have otherwise voted, though I do want to support those authors.
That being said, folks got to use their votes how they see fit.