By "abuse" I meant posts attempting to promote demonstrated scam schemes, phishing posts, child pornography or other such egregious abuses. I think it's a very, very slippery slope to start calling abuse the fact that suesa post racked up $900 or that yallapapi scored $500. I haven' t read the others in the list but I read those two and I upvoted them.
Are they worth that much ? Heck, who am I to judge ? Are Cristiano Ronaldo or Neymar Jr worth the money they are making ? In my opinion no, but again, who am I to judge ? Some people take from the same "reward pool" (the sum of all euros printed by the ECB) and directs those euros to Cristiano Ronaldo and Neymar Jr. That is the system ! If I disagree, I try to do politics to change the system. But I'm not "downvoting" Ronaldo and Neymar
When @heimindanger and others downvote @suesa's post and @yallapapi's post I feel insulted ! I feel that my very right to upvote a post is being questioned ! Do I have a right to express my liking for a post ? Because I feel that the flaggers want to deny me this right ! They want to censor my right to vote posts that I consider worthy of my votes !
You are Steem voter and that is precisely who judges. That's how this decentralized system works.
Who the hell are you to be above questioning? This is a decentralized system run by voters. Voters have to be free to disagree or it is meaningless and dysfunctional.
BTW, your right to upvote the post is not being questioned. You can do so any time you want. Others can downvote any time they want. The system adds up the votes and allocates rewards. End of story.
The power of the voters is highly centralized, and thus the system is highly centralized. All it takes is enough money to capture it. It makes no difference how many voters vote. It only matters how much money votes, in regards to rewards and witnesses.
Since the money is highly concentrated, power is highly centralized in the accounts the money is concentrated in.
Hi again, I've published a more (too?) detailed analysis why I believe using the downvote might be useful for the economics of the reward pool but detrimental overall to the Steem system
https://busy.org/@sorin.cristescu/steemit-and-the-fractal-society
You don't seem to have the slightest idea of human psychology and of sociological mechanisms. You remind me of myself 20 years ago.
If only you'd admit that you might be able to learn something and maybe be ready, with strong arguments, to change your mind, that would already be progress.
I change my mind all the time, but be aware that I do consider the economic issues facing Steem to be dire, potentially failure-inducing, so I'm willing to accept costs in other dimensions. You may be surprised to learn that at times I have been against downvoting for what I suspect (without having read yet) are many of same psychological and sociological reasons that are you. But there is a point where one must prioritize the lesser harms (and/or reducing the greater risks), and we probably just disagree about that.
I will read your post and consider your point of view. Thanks.
thank you