You're hardly a newcomer anymore nor was that comment you replied to about the views of newcomers about downvotes, we were discussing content surrounding Hive.
Quoting @heretickitten
Drama about Hive, stats about Hive, basically anything that references Hive, is like going to a library to read books about the library.
Yeah okay don't be so distressed snowflake, I hardly downvote nor is it any of my focus, I work on other things on Hive not to spend all my days answering to people who seem to want to get stuck on one thing and give up on Hive over it even though you're journey has started on a silver platter yet you're wasting it on the first complication that may arise.
When you have a system that enables powerful whales to target and abuse people and ideas they disagree with, I view that as a flaw that must be fixed before this platform can genuinely take off.
Okay then what about the enabling of powerful whales who are constantly enabling dangerous thinking, conspiracies and other shit which outside of Hive on the rest of media is turning your country into a giant pile of fucking dogshit, mate. Shouldn't we also discuss that problem, the literal abuse of Hive's trending and making us look like we just accept any garbage with 0 engagement a couple whales decide to vote up to trending daily and make Hive look more dead than it is? Or should we just continue to cry over some of our friends missing out on some rewards because they decided to be an asshole to a whale and anyone who agrees with said whale?
Again you seem to worry about how downvotes may effect people's curation rewards yet fail to mention how shitty upvotes that lead to a lot of overrewarded content was for years giving wrongful ROI to any autovoting maximizers and all their stake too much rewards. That was fixed now in the recent HF so what you say here:
makes it extremely hard for you to accept or support any major changes
Doesn't make any sense as I accepted all these recent changes with my witness and I'm open to hearing some real solutions that "hurr durr let's limit how much an account can upvote and downvote and ignore sybil attacks cause we can't think that far ahead" or "lol let's have 1 person and others voting for it cancel an account". At the same time why are you expecting rewards to be guaranteed? Doesn't that remove the whole gamification and making good curators? It's linear curve now, to be a good curator and receive close to 12% ROI will mean being able to avoid posts that are going to get downvoted. This is now the one thing manual curators may be able to do better than autovoters and reward those curators with more trails seeing as they can avoid posts that are going to get downvoted because THEY WILL BE GOOD AT CURATING.
But no, downvotes evil, we need guaranteed 12% ROI and daily post farms so we can become like proof of stake. It's almost hilarious you're invested in a project called proof of brain yet fail to realize all those aspects about hive curation.
So give us some solutions that still don't let people farm endlessly and open up that window of abuse and at the same time keeps rewards at a moderate level when/if Hive were to rise by a lot. Is that something you've thought about as well? Say if Hive were to go up by 100x, do you think I should be making $10k per post OR do you think maybe we could possible use downvotes cleverly and without abuse to bring down the rewards a tad to make sure they're spread out more evenly to possibly 100x more users that may arrive by then.