First of all, even the largest of whales is not 'donating' their worth when they upvote. The amount of the community's reward pool that vote receives is influenced by the whale's STEEM power. That value is coming from the reward pool that the whole community needs to share.
So, you can't have it both ways.
If one whale can upvote and reward a portion of the reward pool to someone, then another whale can downvote and negate some of that reward.
That is how balance on the platform is maintained.
The problem is that while people love to receive those big upvotes, they take it real person when the upvote gets negated. They think it is being personally taken away from them.
You need to keep in mind, that reward is not yours until the post pays out and then you get the balance between the up and down votes.
BTW, if someone believes that a person should absolutely receive the amount of that vote without question, there is a feature called Transfer in the wallet tab where the person can send that donation to the person and no one can negate it.
I think in most worlds, that is called 'putting your money where your mouth is' ... there are no transaction fees on STEEM.
Thank you for taking the time to reply. I know you're explaining the rules as they stand on steemit. I understand them fully and I fully disagree with them. The downvoting and flagging is a flawed feature as it stands. It's being abused. In my mind there is no need the the negative behaviour than encourages and rewards ignorance. If a whale disagrees with a post and it's payout all he needs to do to affect the rewards pool distribution is instead of using the full weight of his it negatively, to use it positively and upvote a post the believes has virtue. So instead of simply denying someone their earnt rewards he can upvote someones post significantly. The world is a wild varied and fantastic place full of diverse language, religion and belief systems. No one should have the right to censor another. As far as rules go, the majority of Nazi's followed the rules in WW2. Look where that took them an the deeds that were done under the guise of obeying orders by their superiors. Quoting the 'rules' has little value. Discussing and suggesting the effects, debating options and methods for improvement has high value.
I just followed the whole explanation @tarquinmaine and @pathtosuccess . I really appreciate it. It's not easy to catch on to all the nuances of the site. Im starting to get though.
there is a lot of nuances @cflclosers. For the most part they are worth learning them and being part of the community.
Your premise is dead wrong. While that will give someone a better potential rewards, it does nothing to solve the problem of the over valued post other than possibly lowering it a small amount. A very small amount.
Well, there is where you have yet another fallacy. The rewards are not earned until the end of the seven day voting period. Until then, they are potential rewards and subject to movement up or down. That movement can be shifting in the reward pool due changing STEEM value or voting patterns or it can either up or downvoting.
The system has to have balance and that means the ability to both increase and decrease potential rewards.
The system will not be changed from that basic principle so I guess you're going to either need to adapt or decide this platform isn't for you. It wont be for everyone.