it is very related as you have it doing the same thing you do.
this isn't "my way", downvote mana was quite literally introduced to fight off vote buying and other forms of abuse, it's not just for the usual hivewatcher scope.
You devalue curation and the thing that makes hive unique by buying votes, it's a literal attack on the chain and how distribution of stake is meant to be handled. If you just want consistent returns no matter what you post or if anyone consumes the content go to any of the other PoS or DPoS chains, doing it here just makes those who still try to use curation the way it is meant to be used lose out on returns cause of these schemes you're involved in, and that's not just you but everyone participating in these from buyers/delegators to the voters and sellers.
I want to use these returns to help out newbies. A large portion of what I earn goes to the community accounts. The community accounts (which, by the way, actually don't have much delegated to these projects, as I pointed out in my post) use their earnings to give HSBI to people who post in the community. It's rewarding people using manual curation and this other form of rewards. There's more than one way to approach curation, and this was one that really seemed to vibe with people and keep them coming back. I liked seeing people encouraged by their growing rewards when they put consistent effort over time.
Evidently, having it done your way is more important than actually seeing community activity.
I never denied that there are people who will abuse the delegation projects, but when there's a beneficial use case for them, it should be considered on an individual basis. Imagine that - nuance can exist!
What you do with the rewards doesn't matter much when you receive them in an abusive way towards curation as a whole to begin with. One could also argue why your community should deserve more rewards than anyone else running theirs. Someone with your stake may not be able to reward their community with their votes as much as you do with bought votes. In many ways you're doubling down on the amount of rewards you take from others curating the regular way because you get votes from bought services then offer votes from bought services with the profits.
I can't stress enough that it's one rewards pool and ecosystem, if you make higher returns from a scheme, the scheme makes higher returns from you then you are quite literally taking rewards from others not participating in this. And "this" is growing and the more it grows the worse curation is off and the faster abusers grow compared to those using curation the way it is meant to be used. I'll try simulate this in a post in the future, it's probably a lot of math and may not help make things clearer but I'll give it a go so people can see the longterm effects and exponential pull this has on inflation.