"I just don't like the FAT downvotes on journalistic articles / investigations, including medical information."

Depends on the type of information. How would you see someone downvoting articles promoting products like Doramad under the guise of "medical information"?

I've also seen people promote amygdalin "vitamin B17" pills for treating cancer. Would you be okay for people upvoting "medical information" promoting pills that hydrolyze into cyanide, and can actually kill someone?

How would you feel about downvoting the guy who gave "medical information" to HIV and AIDS patients suggesting they drop their medication because HIV/AIDS, according to his information, is a hoax?

In all of these cases, I have and will continue to downvote 100%. Their informational value is less than 0.

"I didn't earn (nothing earned nothing lost) the potential income" because someone decided so."

That may be, but it only means that someone disagreed with the amount shown.

Many of these conspiracy theory posts that recently have popped up are pretty much carbon copies of eachother.

They really are a dime in a dozen.

There is no creative value in them. There's no productive value either.

So I fail to see why a post like that should be rewarded at all.

"Also those downvotes i believe also blanks the curators money like you highlighted in that one so about half is from curators..."

Yes, and that is only because they upvoted a nonproductive post that doesn't add any value to the subject at hand or the Hive community, be it artistic or journalistic. They might as well be better trying and finding other, actually productive and informative posts to curate to make better returns.