This project is amazing 
Love how the membership tokens are non-fungible and non-transferable!
I think having a different supply of curation tokens may create potential for misunderstanding. Why not use one type of tokens for both membership and voting? Might be what you meant by the idea of curation credits: off-chain points / votes managed in a separate database.
Are you planning to build a custom quadratic voting solution? That sounds very cool ~ you might be interested in this project:
Will artists get more curation tokens / credits for each submitted piece that is approved? Or just for pieces that sell? Unless you have a strong identity solution, the gallery shouldn’t give tokens to everyone who submits artwork. Maybe there can be a voting policy designed to allow Sputnik DAO council members to vote a specific number of times per week? They could vote on art four times in order to double the score of that piece. Nine times to triple the score.
I’m really curious to explore how this approach might be useful in the context of Berry Cards:
Recently, the game design was updated ~ now the first vote on a newly discovered card grants ownership to the voter. Maybe this can be adjusted to serve your purpose?
Let’s imagine… Inverse Gallery DAO members get rewarded in fees and / or “governance tokens” if a piece they voted for is eventually sold. That could empower curators who discover and promote high-quality artwork. However, it could incentivize gallery coordinators / contributors to compromise integrity and cater to what their audience might buy. Ultimately, I’d suggest giving additional voting power to users who identify successful artwork before it reaches a curation score threshold (regardless of sales data).
As for distributing fees based on curation score, I believe that’s a wonderful idea! Maybe consider giving an equal share to everyone above a certain score?
Overall, thank you so much for sharing your ideas! Of course, feel free to completely ignore my feedback ~ looking forward to your presentation 