@stef1, I appreciate your candid comment. Let me make two items very clear. I like @slowwalker 's content. I also enjoy your original art. I think both of you are valuable to this platform. However, let me explain my thought process a bit clearly as I think with you it may be possible to have an intelligent conversation.

I did use google translate to read @oldstone 's post. The first paragraph runs like this:

The United States is struggling unprecedentedly to keep Gisomia. If you look quietly, there is something strange about Korea, the United States, and Japan in relation to the end of Gisomia.

But I am having problem understanding @slowwalker 's comment above:

I am writing essays on the current issues relating to Korea.
I was shaping my idea to write columns in newspapers and journals.
I do not want to be disturbed.

If someone just wants to write in shaping ideas, then why it is important who upvotes and who downvotes that post? Why "how much the post earns" matters?

Many of us have been trying to explain the mechanism of downvote on this blockchain. It is not taking rewards from anyone. It is just redistribution of rewards based on consensus. We do not have to agree on the quality of a content. Hopefully the net result of the cumulative positive and negative bias does that for us for 7 days and then at payout we have an answer.

Is this concept too difficult to understand? Because if you do not understand this it will be difficult for you (or any one) to understand governance on a blockchain.

I hope I am communicating to you in a pleasant way, as you do seem to be a kind and talented individual. Many thanks for your attention.