>Replace the 30 minute period with a 5 minute period
5 minutes is enough for a competent curator to normally determine if he likes a post, in my opinion. Let’s change the period to something that fits the time to evaluate most posts, not just the longest and most complex ones.

If a post takes 20 minutes to read, how would a curator know in five if it's good or not? How does reading a quarter of something show competence? Also within that 5 minutes just how many other posts will the curator miss? How many posts are actually made per second on Steemit? Doesn't this give an unfair advantage to people who write short, simplistic posts?

Actually isn't giving curators a shorter time more likely to make them less competent at actually choosing quality over content produced by popular or favoured users?