No worries for reaching out. I should maybe explain in each post I downvoted, because it's impersonal and confusing otherwise. Thanks for reminding me of that.
I see that the posts in the Project Hope community are being set to 50% beneficiary of a Project Hope account and then the main Project Hope account is then upvoting those posts to a high value. I see this as the owners of the Project Hope accounts using the community's posts to vote on themselves for profit (beyond normal curation rewards) and my downvote is to help remove the profitability of the scheme. My downvote means nothing personal about you or your post. You've done nothing wrong.
I suggest to the owners of the Project Hope accounts that they discontinue this scheme because it's going to result in downvotes on their community members' posts like this.
Thank you very much for explaining the downvote, your rationale does make sense and I'll pass the info back on to those in charge of the PH team.
Perhaps I can give a little background on why I give 50% back. It was requested of a bunch of regular (longer term) posters as a way of building the PH-Support fund so that it becomes more sustainable and community voting is less dependent on a few bigger whales in the curation trails. I'll be honest I still don't fully understand the economics of the platform, but the bottom line for me appeared to be little differences between my previous 20/30% beneficiary and then 50%.
Anyway, thank you again for explaining. It is a little more reassuring that the downvote isn't a reflection on the quality of my content. I spend a few hours each weekend writing an article so it is kinda a kidney punch to get blank negative feedback. Thanks also for permitting me to use this content to respond to you. Let me know if you'd like me to remove this info so as not to take the comments on this article on too much of a tangent.