“Eliminating “abuse” is not possible and shouldn’t be the goal. Even those who are attempting to “abuse” the system are still doing work. Any compensation they get for their successful attempts at abuse or collusion is at least as valuable for the purpose of distributing the currency as the make-work system employed by traditional Bitcoin mining or the collusive mining done via mining pools. All that is necessary is to ensure that abuse isn’t so rampant that it undermines the incentive to do real work in support of the community and its currency.” — Steem Whitepaper 15/32

Please note how they speak to the "issue" or "none-issue" either agnostically or amorally by using the word abuse in quotes an equal number of times as it is used not in quotes. This suggests competing viewpoints in the minds of the various authors. Who knows, had the "it's not abuse" crowd won, maybe there wouldn't be downvotes at all? I have no clue how deep the rabbit hole goes in that regard. Or I could be wrong entirely if this is some kind of sick and twisted social psychology experiment designed to see how people react than that would be another reason to employ the doublespeak they used.