After reading a lot on downvotes and witnessing the voting wars I have come to see them as important in order to represent both sides of the social media discourse.
Much like the voting power keeps the amount of Hive in check that someone can be rewarded, so the downvotes keep trash from becoming trending posts.
That said, I still find rather often that the most active downvoters I come across never publish anything themselves. It's weird that someone can dish out downvotes per automation tools and reblogs (spams) only drugwars fights all the time yet can't be downvoted for it, simply because he never originates anything.
It's not that I would want to start a voting war punishing him for his decision, it's just that his reputation never gets a scratch this way despite the fact that all he does is downvoting actual meaningful and valuable content because he can. Guess what I am looking for is some sort of accountability. If the community is fed up with the dude and his abuse of downvotes to great content, why can't we scratch his reputation accordingly?
His unscathed reputation suggests to newcomers that he is a responsible member of the community when provably he is anything but.