"By setting your posts at some percent beneficiary to @ph-fund, you participated in the vote buying/self-voting scheme."
if what you say is true, can you explain why this article that does not have the % set to ph, received positive votes (Master mind)
Which other vote buying/self-voting scheme will accuse me in this case?
what you do is called censorship and the only purpose is to harm the creator of the community because of a personal war you have, for you the small accounts are only means with which you hope to reach an end (that only you know), or at least that's what your actions show..
Finally, while you from the comfort of your homes hurt people who have nothing to do with your private wars, we will continue to stand firm in our support of the community, as doing so does not imply that we are breaking any rules. set a% of our articles for a user or a community. "We don't do it to get favours from anyone", we do it because we want to support that community or user.
It's no coincidence that post wasn't upvoted by PH accounts, because you didn't set it to pay 50% to ph-fund. That's the heart of the matter. I wouldn't have downvoted that post and I haven't been downvoting posts that aren't paying ph-fund a cut.
The rest of your comment is nonsense. Piotr is a crook but I didn't downvote the PH community's posts until I learned of this scheme. And I'm not trying to take the posts to zero either. As a stakeholder in Hive, you're welcome for the rewards you've been earning from the inflation of my own stake. I realize if you don't understand how Hive works, it's easy to be ungrateful. But the glass-half-empty attitude is not really the way to look at it.