That was a long time ago. I cant really remember the names nor would i want to share them after so much time...
Just an example.
I remember there was something where you had to prove yourself that you were a good curator before you became a curie curator. You had to send posts to your mentor that was a top curator there. There was one top curator that after learning who your mentor was would tell you to send him/her the posts instead and that they would put a "good word" in for you. lol
I think this was after you stepped back a bit. Its all a bit fuzzy if im honest but i remember there was favoritism from those making calls on what will be curated based on which curator proposed it.

This was all when steem price was fairly high compared to today so you could make a decent paycheck from curation.

These are all internal things, insignificant in the grand scheme of things which turned me off from Curie but on the outside and with the work Curie was doing, curie was overwhelmingly positive in every way.

people claiming to be Curie hotshots when they were just one of a hundred other curators. Also, there's no one "in charge".

Not sure how you do it now but before a curator would send in his post recomendation and there was 2-5 (cant remember exactly) people and only one needed that would approve the post for a curie vote and give the expected reward to the curator.
Those that approve posts for curation could be seen as "being in charge". I always saw that as the main point of weakness in the otherwise well calibrated system.