The other thing worth mentioning is that when someone downvotes they have sacrificed an equal opportunity at getting curation rewards, granted they wouldn't self-vote which would be what they had sacrificed if they downvote. You not only made assinine remarks that steem would be better without people downvoting plagiarists, spam and abusive self-voting, by saying that what mark is doing is fraud and steem would be better without his sacrifices but previously you maintained that you have no trust in others doing the same, which only leaves the obvious to conclude, or that you would be happily abusing the system and that's why you think steem would be so much better. To try to maintain that people don't sacrifice anything when they downvote and actually try to fling nonsense accusations that they are "increasing their voting power by downvoting" only speaks on the kind of idiocy that comparably thinks a chance at earning 80 dollars by wasting that vote, could somehow be mitigated by the downvote, and I don't take you to be that gaping of a moronic suckhole, only that you're a douchebag who cannot wait to abuse the system in the absence of those that are willing to check abuse.
You began all this by accusing Andarchy of omitting crucial information of "the downvoted rewards go back into the pool" which is not correct as the downvoted shares don't go back into the pool but get fractioned into all the pending payouts for that period. You have no fucking respect and sought to attach your insinuating bullshit as if it was a revelation and it had any bearing on what the post is about while maintaining the absurdity of sacrificing rewards directly to increase the voting power for everyone indirectly so as to profit directly from downvoting.
Posted using Partiko Android