Do the rules incentivize you to do that though? Instead of doing it, the people with $100 votes hold contests for the chance to earn a 100% updoot. But even then, with the downvote rules as they are, it would be dumb for someone to waste a 100% $100 upvote on something that anyone else can "take away." Please don't think I am against downvotes. I understand why they are necessary. I just don't think the rules on how they work are fair. (and this is from someone that hasn't been downvoted) I would like to see downvote curation trails 😅 Un-Curie if you will. Where the community gets to decide on the value of a vote more than the individual. We're trying to break away from the individual controlling the user, right?

The Korean vote on Steem was lost because the heads of state around here refused to even talk to the Korean people about the way downvotes are done. Countless times on the town halls it was just "there will be no discussion on downvotes being removed." Not that I think any of us give a shit about that chain anymore lol. Downvotes should simply carry 25% of the vote as an upvote to prevent ONE USER from ruining the chain for others.

If it took a downvote curation trail to enforce a blacklist on HIVE that you believe to be a list for the betterment of the chain would you not use your "free downvote" to support it?

As a little aside... Someone once joked (I assume it's a joke cause it's not true!) that steem/hive is Proof of Brain. I pointed to steemauto/hive.vote and said "there's your proof of brain."