Example: Curation on avg pays 10-15% lets say. When your voting power reaches 100%, you earn 8-9% interest. That is 10-20%+ lower than the avg curator makes, however you still earn a decent amount and isnt the end of the world if you don't curator for a month or two, or ever. 8% vs 10% is not a deathnail to anyones stake in the form of being diluted.
But how do we prevent curation collusion, where curators upvote their buddies/sockpuppets to gain curation + author rewards? If the auto staking-revenue would be curation + author, it would remove the need to curate unfairly and give content creators a reason to level up their content.
So you're referring to the fact that people can make curation + author by self voting. I believe free down votes will stop this. We have stopped the biggest, longest abusers of the system with free downvotes, so much so that pretty much every abuser has turned legit/semi-legit curator. We couldn't give passive stakers the equivalent of what self voters make, because self voters that milk the system is abusive and we don't want to set the standard at "you must abuse to earn at least what you'd make on passive."