As I've said many times, for the most part my downvotes are an opinion that the rewards are too high. It is completely subjective. The system tallies the votes and pays rewards after 7 days.
"For the most part" leaves a huge loophole for many instances of the possibility of dishonest intentions. That needs to be pointed out, whether there are good intentions or not. It's a nice get out clause that can be shaped into whatever reason you want it to be for PR purposes, and that is the problem here. Many people can see though this, and the clarification on this point is a lot more important than you make it appear.
RE: Downvotes & Reward Policing: Abuse of Power or Good for the Platform?