RE: .
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
Apparently, you are unaware that HF21 greatly increased the ability of serial downvoters to abuse people with whom they have ideological differences.
It is not right that one user who NEVER COMMENTS OR POSTS should now be able to destroy another user's account simply because the witnesses (and/or Steemit, Inc.) decided to change the code.
0
0
0.000
That problem also existed before HF21 except that it had an opportunity cost in the form of forfeited curation rewards. It was actually discussed during the first year after the launch of the platform. Dan Larimer was a big proponent of introducing a change in the code that could allow you to negate the vote of another account be it positive or negative.
I am very aware of the posibility of someone using the "free" 2.5 daily downvotes simply to cause chaos or to destroy an account. However, without the "free" downvotes the good actors woud not be able to fight against the drain of the reward pool from the serial spammers and bidbot abusers without the opportunity cost that it entails.
The only solution is to seek the support of other stakeholders or to use another token where the abuser does not have the stake to cause serious harm (for instance Palnet) if that is feasible. Going back to a pre-HF21 situation with no free downvotes is out of the question (unless if a majority of stakeholders decide otherwise and push another change in the code).