The concept of a "reward" needs to be reexamined. Rewards aren't given and then taken away in real life that I've heard of, so the naming nomenclature for what is called "reward" is the wrong word to begin with.

An upvote isn't a reward, it's someone assigning someone else system resources(though why that is done at all still doesn't make sense either). Taking away that assignment of resources via downvoting is taking away someone's potential for earning that system resource. Whether or not it is built into the protocol isn't relevant.

The definition of censorship I provided above.

The definition of Curation is to put on display, to discern and create a list/public work that is on display, or to prominently put on display for others to see. Downvoting removes that to a certain %, so it is the opposite of curating and that means downvoting is suppressing something(censorship).

I'm disagreeing with the incorrect use of terminology that is being used across Hive, I am using historical definitions. Hive has censorship built into the protocol and it's called downvoting, to the degree that happens depends on if a post is lessened somewhat, a lot, a little, or zeroed out. For some reason people equate censorship = deleted, and that's just simply not the case.