As I've said many times, for the most part my downvotes are an opinion that the rewards are too high. It is completely subjective. The system tallies the votes and pays rewards after 7 days.
Of course, I will also on occasion make votes for other reasons, but that's 90% of it at least.
"For the most part" leaves a huge loophole for many instances of the possibility of dishonest intentions. That needs to be pointed out, whether there are good intentions or not. It's a nice get out clause that can be shaped into whatever reason you want it to be for PR purposes, and that is the problem here. Many people can see though this, and the clarification on this point is a lot more important than you make it appear.
"For the most part" in this instance means there may be other reasons such as plagiarism, but usually not since I don't search for those things the way others do.
Let's be honest though, you didn't downvote this post for excessive rewards or plagiarism, but because I called out your tactics as abuse and challenged the supposedly ethical nature of your downvoting, same reason you downvoted @thoughts-in-time recent post calling you out. You nullified rewards because you didn't like what we said, which is clearly punitive in these instances, which just proves our point. But hey, thanks for not bringing the posts down to zero, that is the commendable side of your less than honest actions!
If I think an argument is poorly constructed, pointless, or harmful then yes I don't think it should be rewarded.
Yes, I absolutely consider this post to be overrewarded. Complaining about getting downvoted or getting less rewards should never be rewarded IMO. In fact I'd rather see such posts if they are made at all to decline rewards or donate them. They don't add value in any way that calls for payment.
Got it. You believe your power gives you the right to subjectively determine value of posts, irregardless of the value others see in them. You get to decide what adds value in a way that calls for payment (and usually do so not by supporting content, but by nullifying rewards of content others happen to find very valuable). Thanks for confirming that for us all. You insist this is not abuse, and then turn around and engage in self-voting of comments and habitual voting of spam comments to funnel rewards into your own project off of which you also directly make hundreds in curation rewards daily, behavior a vast majority of users would consider abuse but can do nothing to counter because of the monopoly on stake owned by the few, the blockchain oligarchy. Typical behavior of a tyrant. And that isn't a complaint, just an observation, I could care less about personal loss of rewards, and far more about psychological effects this has on users the platform over, and long term effects of the growth of an otherwise thriving platform.
Enjoy being a reward policeman of the platform, and one of the few power-abusing whales on here who is actively driving many productive and appreciated common users off the blockchain to other far friendlier and less toxic platforms.
I believe that we all stakeholders vote and then the blockchain determines the reward at the end of 7 days. If you don't believe that, you don't understand how Hive works.
There's no monopoly, or anything remotely like it. Anyone can buy or earn stake and mine is less than 1%. With that comes the right to vote on rewards, along with the burden of having your stake diluted to pay for rewards. It goes hand in hand.
Actually not anyone can buy stake, you need to be rich in real life to do that to compete with the likes of some big accounts on here. You can earn stake, sure, but when much of it is often nullified by users like you it makes it a bit more difficult and time consuming process than otherwise... Maybe you don't realize that many people getting rewards on here are struggling in real life, especially in these more difficult times due to lockdowns putting so many out of work, and some people this is their primary means of income, and when an up and coming blogger who normally only makes peanuts gets a first or second bigger payout dinged by big downvote, that would be incredibly demoralizing. I'm used to the downvotes, I deal with it and move on, but not everyone is in a position where they can just invest huge money into a platform they came to seeking alternate ways of making income starting from nothing, just to counter big downvotes. I know people in Africa, South America, Gaza Strip, other impoverished places all utilize it to help pull themselves out of poverty, and you never know when someone's rewards might pay for their family's dinner the next week...
And you can continue to say the 'blockchain' determines reward all you want, despite it only doing so based upon the votes that are cast, as you yourself said above, blockchain votes allocate, before changing your wording to blockchain allocates in later comments. I understand that the only way blockchain determines reward is based on the votes, and downvotes lead to lower rewards, while upvotes lead to bigger rewards. Technically it is the blockchain allocating, but directly based upon the votes that are cast, so don't pretend your votes are not responsible for determining value of someone's payout by nullifying rewards, that is exactly what they are doing or you wouldn't do it to counter what you deem to be 'excessive rewards'.
You sound like Bill Gates would if he were to claim he has no monopoly on power, attempting to convince the people whose government policies (backed by him) have just made jobless and homeless that there's no monopoly, because anyone can be as rich as him. The issue also isn't about your 'right' to downvote, it is over whether this is good for the platform and whether it constitutes abuse. We all accept people can choose how they downvote, I and many others choose to reward content we like and refrain from downvotes, whereas you and some others seem to instead focus bulk of your energy nullifying rewards of content you don't like and using your stake to self-reward via spam comments. To each their own, I'll keep on keeping on and if I eventually tire of the situation, I'll just leave like so many others.
Enjoy being reward policeman of the platform and aiding in stifling the growth of an otherwise thriving platform.
👍
i'm dumping my 20,000 HIVE and buying THETA.
not because i'm being downvoted, i'm strangely NOT downvoted.
but because i've seen way too many unfair downvotes.