In my almost-four year history on Steem I have seen many claims of great initiatives of bringing on many users. They all have one thing in common, which is self-voting, vote-trading, or purchased votes in order to generate large rewards up front, while any actual performance in bringing on a significant number of users is to come later, but in fact it never has.
I'm very much in favor of rewards, even high rewards, where there is visible, verifiable, and compelling value being added to Steem.
It is very easy for anyone to claim their rewards are deserved because of any number of reasons. In fact what I care about is observable value and performance.
Downvotes are necessary for a shared reward pool, otherwise each participant can easily direct common resources to their personal benefit rather than overall benefit to the platform and community. I am open to the idea, as expressed by 
But as long as there is a common shared reward pool, any responsible stakeholder, including myself, not only may, but has a responsibility to, downvote rewards where there is not clearly demonstrated value to the overall community and platform. That is a social obligation not only to protect the value of ones own stake but to the responsible stewardship of the stake of third party, less active, stakeholders.
Finally, I would invite you to join me as well as numerous other stakeholders large and small, in voting for 
@cjsdns
RE: Make a note of the account you are down voting from. like me/down voting하는 계정을 기록해 놓으세요. 나 처럼