Thanks @roleerob, this has come to my attention over the past couple of months. Seeing people who are trying to assist others having to put up with this harassment, I really felt it is time people closed up the ranks and stood together.
His wealth and reputation mean nothing, if one is not fair in approach, not jealous of another's success, discuss the matter.
If money buys accounts, how many does he control? What if his new accounts with 25 reputation run around downvoting folk, (noted, this does not lose value), but throwing disarray into an already large evolving platform called Steem.
This does not bode well for blockchain, selling the idea when some are able to go around making people feel inadequate. To my knowledge SBI came out from the starting blocks stating it was an experiment, for the people, by the people on blockchain, if better ideas come into fruition let them build a side chain and present it.
Plain and simply put bully tactics do not work, should never work. Certain platforms I don't agree with I avoid them by not supporting, free choice?
Thank you for investing some time into a reply @joanstewart. And thank you for the courage to take a stand with your first downvote ever. "May your tribe increase" ...
Agreed about closing ranks, although you will note my caveat in my response to @fenngen above.
Hard to know what the future of the SBI community will be, as Joseph continues to make changes in response to the pressure. I would like to agree with you here ...
... but MK's campaign has already had a substantial negative / destructive impact, as there has, at least thus far (in my view), been an insufficient response from those with sufficient resources to get his attention.
Steem Society needs to try work in building blockchain technology in a positive fashion, negative impact will eventually wear everyone down.
Thanks for insight, not much anyone can do but grin and bear it for now.