I agree with some things you said, but in many cases, you jump to conclusions that I would not have, and in others you simply declare something to be true, and then use that "truth" to build your case.

"without the unsung heroes fighting abuse on this blockchain, the reward pool for honest authors and curators here would be complete shit, because the exploiters would take over"

If that is true (you say it as though it is), then that shows how fragile this blockchain's code really is. If it takes a secret team of "heroes" fighting bad guys and spammers behind the scenes, just to keep the place from falling to complete shit, is it really decentralized? Sounds to me like there's a small group of people deciding what's acceptable and what's not. A bit like vigilantes. Let me guess, most of these people have massive amounts of STEEM, in other words, are untouchable whales and insiders?

Like I said, you say many things I agree with. It's just the stuff that clearly comes from out of nowhere and you just say it like it's a foregone conclusion, like "The only way to fight this is..." That's dangerous talk. I hope you recognize that.

Lastly, if all that you say here is true, why is it not mentioned anywhere in the official descriptions of this site/chain? Not mentioned in the white paper, not mentioned in any rules, or guidelines, or anything official? Why are these unspoken but extremely important new rules, laws even, coming to us from random members of the community? If this is true, it needs to be codified and posted for all to see, not dragged out by vigilantes looking to justify their NewSteem behaviours.