They are used for users to express their dissatisfaction with blog posts
Just a note from me ... they are not to express their dissatisfaction with blog posts. The true reason is they are to represent how much someone wishes for the pool of rewards to be taken on to that post. I can still like that post personally but if I think it should not get any rewards, I can just don't vote for it (although I can even say, on the comments that it was hilarious/funny, etc).
The ideal scenario in my view would be a system of up/down voting (for rewards) to be independent of the "like/dislike" system. This way people could just say something as simple as...
"I really love what you just said, but that should not get any rewards because it's a joke, mess up"
or
"You are really a dumb ass and I hate what you are saying, but that has some value for this blockchain"
or
"I hate what you are saying and you should not get any rewards... for what you are doing"
or
"I really like this and this is how much I would vote for rewards on your post"
All 4 situations exist but are mixed up in a single 2 option scenario, which in many situations will fork into comments explaining why, but not necessarily all the time.
So, if the reason for providing rewards is lured into "liking"... that's not the right expression in my view... I have never seen that as the reason. You can downvote me as much as you wish when you don't like to provide rewards for what I am posting. But when eventually more people agree... that changes on the current system.
This has been an inefficient fight in the past, and I think there is enough proof that it needs "visual" addressing at least... I am just providing my opinion. Anyone can either disagree or not.