smackdown-kitty's actions are not based on community voted abuse but determined by the people behind smackdown-kitty.
Yeah, and it seems that they are only interested in fighting "self-upvoters," but not addressing whether or not the upvoting is actually "abusive." In a recent post, they said that they will tackle the four most "vicious self-upvotes" per day. What is "vicious" and what is the criteria/data used to identify and combat this arbitrary concept?
I think the members behind smackdown-kitty are not bad at all, but indeed, it is not clear what they want to do. Then they also had to post that something went wrong with their bot. And foremost, it is not with the community consent, and that will only start wars again. I opt for community voted fights and then 100% transparency to whatever fights are voted for. So, we shall start with some technology where we enable the community to vote for whatever we want to get a vote for. A central discussion board is required since discussing in posts will get many messages lost, it is too distributed. A central notice board is required as well. A process needs to be put in place to allow anybody who is attacked, to defend him/herself. All of this shall be one click away from the many user interfaces to Steem, starting with Steemit UI since that is the most used interface. The smackdown-kitty guys can be an execution arm flagging those that go against we as the community voted for.