I'm not sure what you mean with the double-dipping ones. At any rate, like I said, I have no issues with the content these projects are voting upon. If I did, I would not support them.
And yes, it's important to acknowledge that you can intimidate people away from posting and commenting. Your earnings are easily 1000x that of newer users who can't afford to purchase stake in the platform the way you and I have. Your HP is also much higher than the average user's HP, and targeting them is a bit unfair when considering the scope of users on this platform. I would use downvotes only if I see blatant misuse such as plagiarism, illegal content, and spam, but I suppose our standards are different - that's ok. Intimidating users with your stake is not ok.
Again, there are different ways to support new users. The community accounts do have voting power, plus there's also HSBI, as well as other 2nd layer tokens which I sometimes give out. That 20k delegation I have going towards LGN - none of the tokens I earn from that right now are going to me. I send them out virtually every day. Same thing with neoxian, most of the tokens I earn from that delegation are not going to me. With Bro, I already sent most of tokens to the community accounts, and EDS is the only one that I'm actually keeping to myself for now. Even that's not intended to be a permanent voting fixture, if you read about their project. The delegation to leo.voter is only earning me LEO tokens because I think their efforts make it a worthy project; their onboarding method with Keystore is actually outstanding.
Anyway, I don't want to start defending every single delegation I have. These are my funds, and I think how I'm using them is appropriate because I trust these projects and their owners to use the delegation appropriately.
Let's just agree to disagree, ok?
No one's trying to intimidate or threaten newcomers you dunce,we literally onboard people and curate them for months until they can stand on their own. I agree that this discussion is pointless but I'm not just going to look away when I see curation being misused. I didn't do it when Koreans with 80m sp did it, when bid bots with 30m sp attempted to continue doing it and other various schemes and tricks we've seen spring up over time. At least some of the owners of these accounts I've talked to admitted to what they were doing rather than going out of their way to defend it or point me as some asshole just looking to cause drama or drive people away when I've been doing to complete opposite for almost a decade.
When you start resorting to name-calling, the conversation is finished. I've been respectful to you throughout all of our interactions, even when you (fine, unintentionally) painted me in a poor light, but I won't accept nor reciprocate rudeness. Goodbye.
I'm trying to point you to wrongdoing and you keep saying "let's agree to disagree" like we're having a discussion over pineapple on pizza. I'm trying to explain to you how you're taking away author rewards from the very same newcomers you pretend to care about by guaranteeing votes your way and encouraging projects to drive up delegations of greed that take even more rewards away that could've gone to potential new users or at least users deserving it more and putting in the effort and you're treating it as if it's just a fucking opinion.
Yes i like to use all spectrum of language to try and get a point across or when I feel people are being difficult on purpose and evading or looking for excuses to continue shitting on the very thing that makes this place special.
The conversation is over.