Curators don't make money for down votes. So nuking a post (anyones) pays them nothing.
It is more about them either saying "I don't like it", "I don't like the title, didn't read the rest", "@dan voted on it so I'm going to down vote it", or "It is making too, nuch but my buddy over here I like posting the simple stuff, every one of his posts are gold and worth thousands"
Yes that last one happened. That's what gets a lot of us. Hypocrisy.
as far as I can tell) Another reason is he will reason with people rather than calling them an idiot. I also don't know that I've caught him saying he down voted something without reading it. Has he done any of these things? Perhaps, but if he has I have not seen them.@smooth for example. I don't really agree with his use of the flag at times, but I don't speak badly about him for a couple of reasons. He is not hypocritical about it. He is vague at times, but not a hypocrite. (
He is voting how he wants, and I do think it is a negative. Yet he doesn't make up excuses and then do actions that make those excuses totally hypocritical.
no value" and don't care if that can be really hurtful to someone. Basically a bot to try to prepare them early on so we have less people that it happens to that don't know why, and get depressed, leave, talk about it on FB, Youtube, Reddit (doubt that, as it is far more aggressive there), etc.@personz did have something worth perhaps trying to negate some of the negative impact of the down vote. New people have a bot flag them once with explanations on how to look up who down voted you, so you can see if it was a bot or not, and to explain that there can be people that believe your article has "
It might help some. It is the people that have been silenced or ran off by this, and the people who don't come here because of this that motivates my responses.
yeah newbies are taking the brunt since they haven't had the time to get the thick skin, and the winds blow strong from time to time, I remember not even knowing what polo was, seemed like a shady bank of steem for me people just feeding it cash, :D
but spend enough time and there is no problem, around 2-3 months of activity is enough
Well someone that was up beat and has been around for a lot longer than that said she thinks she'll stop for a bit. It is pretty harsh.
Also as to me going after Bernie. I tend to always chime in on these flagging posts. I generally do not name a specific person until they step forward and engage me. My big post came after Bernie decided to throw insults and ad hominems my way. He didn't read that. He admits to not reading quite a few things he down votes. I really don't ever believe he is likely to change. Let's just say it is not very probable (leaving a rare chance it happens), but others besides him I think there is still a chance they might start to get how their short term goal they think is positive likely has long term goals that are a much bigger negative than what they thought they were stopping. I do not believe most of them are doing it for malicious reasons.
Yet there are consequences... When you are powerful enough you are flying above the land you might not see so clearly the perspective of those as a lower altitude when you swoop down to do what you consider a correction, but your target and others view it as an attack.
Are they both right? From their own perspectives yes.
When it comes to PR and marketing, perception is all that matters.