"There is no censorship on hive."

How are spam, scams, and plagiarism prevented on Hive?

"Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship

"The term censorship refers to the suppression, banning, or deletion of speech, writing, or images that are considered to be indecent, obscene, or otherwise objectionable."
https://legaldictionary.net/censorship/

I could go on. However, I have repeatedly posted proof that censorship is not only possible on Hive, it is critical to Hive's existence, because without censorship scams, spam, and plagiarism would make Hive unusable and pointless. It is completely nonsensical to aver that censorship does not exist on Hive.

Censorship, as I have pointed out repeatedly without any acknowledgement from you, ranges from tactical application of nuclear weapons to mild dispproval at social gatherings, and comprises any mechanism that suppresses the dissemination of information. It is one of the most venerable and time-tested means of censorship to disrupt or seize financial resources, because economic matters are critical to the felicity of humanity, and creators of content usually go to the trouble to create it in order to gain financial resources.

Downvotes are censorship by the standard and accepted definition of censorship by every authoritative source, and have met that definition that has existed since the dawn of history. Reducing the economic viability of creators of content intended to be suppressed was within the definition of censorship practiced in ancient Sumer, and is within the definition of censorship today. Denying this is factually correct is delusional.

"We are not planning to incentivize scientists with hive rewards."

Then what is the point of publishing scientific researchers papers on Hive? Is the blockchain more durable than clay tablets? Do you aver that scientific researchers do not respond to economic incentives like all other content creators, and will be drawn to publish on Hive for some other, inarticulated, encomium? The whole point of the platform that has become Hive is that the financial rewards of creating content was not nominally shared with creators, but was monopolized by centralized platforms, and the author rewards upvotes provided directly financially incentivized creators, while the blockchain prevented deletion of their content.

Doesn't paper, being a physical medium, prevent deletion just as effectively? Don't stacks of cash handed to creators at drug-fueled orgies by professional drug dealers provide economic incentive to publish content praising the benefit of illegal drugs as well, or better, than upvotes? In order to improve the integrity of scientific research publishing, Hive will need to offer nominal incentives to researchers to overcome the economic incentives to bias their reports. Since Hive doesn't have the reputation venerated science journals have to grantors, whom are the sources of income of scientific researchers, how will Hive create incentives for researchers to publish their research on Hive?

"You sound like a broken record."

Why do broken records repeat themselves? Because the information they are conveying does not change when the needle repeatedly responds to the recorded information they are confined to by the scratch that breaks them. The definition of censorship hasn't changed in millennia, and simply denying it applies to Hive is fake news. The proof that news is fake necessarily refers to facts, which remain the same each time they are referred to.

It is the scratch in the record that requires repeating the same information that is factually embedded in the groove. It is not the fault of the information being repeated, but of the scratch that requires repeating that information. You get the same factual information every time you derange the mechanism by asserting censorship doesn't exist on Hive because fake news leads back to the actual facts that refute it.