There still is the reality of providing value to the reader which can only be evaluated by the reader. Articles can be high quality and well written, but still not resonate with readers. Providing earnings for articles that get few reads, comments, highlights or claps is not fair to the writers who produce content that people really want to read. Not every writer or article is created equal even when the writing is considered high quality and earnings shouldn’t be divvied up based on the assumption that they are. I would love it if this were to be the case as I think I write well but have difficulty creating content that really reaches or touches people in some way. I am improving at this but still don’t see nearly the engagement that many other writers do. So I would definitely benefit under the system you described and would probably at least double my income if it were put into place.

There is also the issue that earnings come from member fees so what members read and how the value what they read should be a big part of determining where their money goes.

I think it’s great that you are considering other options to make earnings as fair as possible and creating dialogue about this issue. Kudos!