The value of their post is too high.
Not really if you properly appraise the risk of engaging in negative curation against bad actors. Those posts set such individuals as beneficiaries. The way I see, if anything they are undervalued. The rewards are well earned for the activity and energy committed to the chain.
But you're entitled to your opinion however unfair it is. It's easy to generalize people and miss the forest for the trees. I think such is your error.
Your thought is too rough. You value people by what one did, not by each posts they write. It's like if a good man rape your wife, you still appraise it's good, cause the other things he did is good grossly.
That's not how law works. People should be judge by each behavior(or a sequence if they're associated)