I would consider (sadly) Matsodon as an anti-example. As much as we all know the issues with “the algorithm”, people find real value in automatic curation that I suspect is best served by a centralized authority.
All that said, my experience with mastodon is the opposite of what you described. I find the chronological feed to be always interesting and much less frustrating and emotionally draining than any curated feed that I know of. Members are a lot more considerate too. From the discussions there, I know that there are a lot of others who hold the same opinion.
Mastodon seems high quality now only because "no one" is on it. It's currently self-selecting like minded people who are invested in making it work. Add a million people a day for a year and see what happens.
No community survives the eternal September.
The mistake is in thinking that the -tech interface- matters. It does not. The size, and quality, of the community directly dictates the size and quality of the content.