For your first paragraph, check my latest reblog, when people who are in need need help and have a history on the immutable database we're on proving they've been valuable contributors to Hive apart from just posting content then the community steps up and helps them, we don't need a centralized sole owner to an account holding an emergency fund that lacks all transparency and trust. Transactions are instant and feeless, it's easy to use them transparently.
Funny you have no number, if only it could be made transparent on a public ledger where literally most things are transparent.
Not sure what you mean with user training but yes many communities guide newcomers and help them get started, how to write better and format their posts, etc. Hive is not in charge to guide people through schools, they can do so with their earnings if they prefer but here again having a centralized specific fund for this removes transparency and gives more leeway to abuse and lack of documentation and proof of what is being done with them.
This isn't a hate campaign, you guys are the ones deciding to see downvotes as hate, many others see them as downvote curation and discouraging the use of schemes that go against the rest of what the platform has agreed is acceptable at this hardfork and the rules it has in place right now.
We're not haters, we work just as hard if not more than people in your community, we all want the best for Hive and it to be as fair as possible to authors, curators and delegators and not give any of the three a bigger advantage cause they may happen to find a "hack" they think they're super innovative about which is something most people had thought of but realized it's not something that's fair and shouldn't be persued.
I don't understand what you mean with "payment for support".
Reward.app has its downsides and the innovation of it was controversial as well but no one is using that part of it (where you can choose to give curators a bigger part of the post rewards). The intentions were for people to be able to write shorter posts/low effort posts and forfeit part of the post rewards they may be getting when autovotes are rampant, which they still are today (my account as a prime example) and I have used it that way often but I haven't seen curators target it for that reason along and been monitoring it if it was being abused in promoting garbage posts. There again downvotes are an easy tool to combat it and both the curators and author are at risk if they don't use it well. Most people have only used it to liquidate their post rewards, it's a shame some don't want to remain powered up and earn curation and use the influence of hivepower but if people want to powerdown they will do it either way (just slower), that doesn't mean much for hive's price or sell pressure as the markets are daily pushing out way more volume than the inflation we have and there's so much more stake being powered down actively than there's inflation going out to authors so it's a minor thing. Aside from that there was another project doing the same thing before (likwid) and it was taking a much bigger service fee for providing liquids in exchange for it getting the stake.
Curating content based on beneficiaries of self-interest is frowned upon and won't be tolerated. Instead of whining about the "hate" and "centralization" and all other things I've been hearing these past few days how about you guys finally man up and be transparent of the cut the owner of the curation project takes, how his personal account is earning way more APR than the other project's accounts and how literally no fucking one in your community is mentioning that with PH's accounts growing so does his fucking cut. Stop living a fucking lie you brainwashed cultist.