There are two sides to that coin. In buying steem and hodling steem, I also have downvote autonomy. As you described in your initial reply, the defined reasons for downvotes are somewhat vague. How could the definition be anything but vague? They are a technical feature of the blockchain, just like upvotes. They represent a choice just like upvoting. No amount of code or AI at this stage could define heuristics needed to support enforcing proscribed downvotes.

Consider this very post. Over half of its value was diminished by downvoters, but other sovereign upvoters decided to restore most of those rewards through upvotes. The two different sides coalesced on my post and it's still valued within $3 of it's prior high. Until the 7 days is over, who knows what will happen from here?

You can make written appeals to sovereign voters in either direction to better use their upvotes or downvotes, as you are doing now with me. But at the end of the day, those opinions are ultimately expressed by their very use.

I think we have a fundamental disagreement in regard to the long term value of large steem holders with specific voting behaviors.

The majority of large holders are actually responding with surprising agility. For everyone else, being obstinate is their right, and perhaps they can remain successful doing so. If so, more power to them. To put a capitalistic spin on it, they can either adjust to the market forces they are presented with and thrive, or they can swim against the current.