RE: What keeps you from using your daily free downvotes?
Hi Folker
Thanks for showing up and commenting!
If you consider this post to be overvalued I'd like to encourage you to downvote it accordingly. And don't assess longer as you usually do before you upvote a post wich you consider undervalued. I would take your downvote as nothing else but another stakeholder exerting his influence on how to allocate from our shared reward pool. Steem won't have a sustainable economy if there isn't a sufficient number of stakeholders who assume their ownership of the Steem inflation and actively manage its distribution based on their subjective judgement. Having the possibility to counter the assessment made by others is inevitable to make all of this work, no matter how many stakeholders came to an assessment different from yours. If you just move on to upvote another post it means that you limit your influence to distribute what others left for you to distribute.
If you are interested you can read more about my view on downvotes in my reply to Abigail. I took the liberty to tag you there.
I consider it overvalued, not worthless. So I gave you a token +1%, if I remember correctly. A recent post of @therealwolf I had found vastly overvalued and abusive to boot, so he got -100% including an explanatory comment. I understand how it works. BTW, he told me to get a life or something and proceeded to mute my comment into oblivion, like I was any old troll. Win some, lose some...
I know that and trust it. In fact, I honestly believe that many "old" Steemians would see it exactly the same way, a few assholes notwithstanding. To me, the revenge downvotes per se are not the big problem, but I reject downvoting on principle as I don't like negativity.
If I don't upvote a post it's a judgement on my part that said post is worthless to me and only to me. I don't feel I have a right to take away from those who upvoted the post, i.e. they found it valuable to them. I consider the logic behind downvoting re. shared pool, sustainability, re-allocation, etc. utterly flawed. If it were such a good thing it would be self evident and didn't have to be defended tooth and nails by those who advocate it.
Example: If I see a beggar in the street I don't give them any money. Here in Germany, this person only needs to go to the welfare office and will be helped generously, probably that very day. So I don't attribute any social value to this person's begging and have better ideas how the money in their hat should be used. However, I don't punch them in the face, tell them what worthless human trash they are, and proceed to steal their hat with the cash to "reallocate" it. THIS IS EXACTLY HOW I FEEL ABOUT DOWNVOTES. (Not the nuissance-troll-asshole ones, those are best ignored.)
An aside: I'm not that heartless. I DO give money to street musicians because I appreciate their performance (upvote!) and to beggars with dogs, because they have a hard time getting help in homeless shelters or finding social housing with the animal. (Hence the passion re. @nosdos.) Anyway, different subject...
If Steem is not sustainable without downvotes maybe there shouldn't be a Steem. (Cases of outright plagiarism, reward pool rape, etc. notwithstanding.) That greed is a problem is also well established. Funny, the greedy ones often are the biggest downvote advocates... I feel that sustainability could be reached if we came to a culture where upvotes, especially big ones, aren't given so easily and downvotes the weapon of last resort to combat outright abuse.
I understand the sustainability issue somewhat, thanks to @penguinpablo (the data guy) who was nice enough to explain it to me. Maybe I'm wrong, but we don't need to rehash that stuff. I don't like the current culture here, and I'm on my way out because #newsteem took away the "visibility on demand" that was valuable to me, without providing an adequate replacement.
@wulff-media Some accounts with high SP seem to exist only to use their power to heavily downvote those they hate (for whatever reason) - and one (or more, like maybe same guy with several accounts) I am aware of seems to be a stalking troll who does not post himself at all, but just uses his big SP to downvote. Giving haters (that can afford to invest large amounts in Steem) that much power without any kind of checks and balances can also damage this platform.
The incidences of heavy weighted downvotes I am aware of are seemingly politically (and perhaps also racist) motivated actions by one (or more?) ultra-right-wing actors.