Thank you, but he made it clear to me in the following words, and I think I understand:
I don’t feel your posts add any value to this blockchain in my opinion. ... If posts do not add any value it can be posted for sure but doesn’t need to be rewarded. ... if [all your posts get zeroed out] in my opinion that would be appropriate.
Since my posts he downvoted are extensively documented fact- and evidence-based posts quoting over a dozen scientific journals, I must conclude that the Hive “consensus” is that facts, evidence, and science are not considered valuable, at least not if they challenges azircon’s covid dogma. If not the consensus, then this behavior should not be tolerated.
When I asked him if indeed he thought facts and science were not valuable, he sidestepped the question and told me he was being courteous, because apparently sweeping downvotes of all active posts is a courteous way to treat someone you disagree with. It is becoming clear to me that Hive is not welcoming of the very free speech it marketed itself as being geared towards. I was encouraged to leave if I didn’t like the downvotes, because:
People are free to upvote what they want, people are free to downvote what they want. It is as simple as that.
It seems a big part of downvoting by these accounts is punishing and chasing off the dissenters. Just like Big Tech social media. Not the kind of ‘community’ I came here to be a part of. At least now I know why my posts are and may be downvoted from here on forth, because truth has no value on here.
Each individual gets to set their own parameters, it's just how dpos was designed.
I feel for you getting singled out in this, but unless you join the conversations that are taking place, it is harder for your voice to be considered in the consensus.
The links to the conversations are in my daily posts.
I hope you persist, but, it is more for those that do if you go.
It's a conundrum.