I don't blame them for being touchy, they have suffered many false accusations over the last 5 years, not least of which includes collusion.

The fact remains without many of those names you mentioned hive would not even exist.
For that, they have some deference coming.
Some benefit of the doubt.

If they would have continued the whale experiment I would have mad respect for them, but instead they insist on putting their preference on who gets rewards.

If you can show the incestuous nature of the voting here, please do.
This tendency to circle jerk is hurting the distribution of the coin.
The more hands we get hive into, the better for us all, iyam.

About the only way to end the circle jerk is for another group of crabs to overpower the circle, otherwise, this is what we get.

This fact is why I call for a 1000mv voluntary limit on voting.
We need to make it customary that once you get to 1000mv you need to stop taking so much from the rest of us.

Just as the minnows are expected to act right once they get to 1mv, the whales should stop eating their own tails at 1000mv, imo.

Less than 70 accounts would be impacted by this.
The rest of us would see our vote values double, at least.
Allowing the redfish more say in who gets rewards would result in more redfish getting more rewards.