Who was I abusing in this post reply thread to have been downvoted so hard? My comments were dissenting, nothing more. Bots were used to give more weight to my words, but in the case above I did not use that bot. Someone else did because their vote weight was not sufficient enough. It wasn't self-voting. It wasn't abuse. It was just an opinion someone with more money didn't like.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
"Abuse" is a bit too strong of a word this case, but people have spoken that they did not find your content worthy of rewards.
Yes, value of dissenting opinions is also important and should be partially preserved, but in my opinion (speaking for my own downvote) stating that "Weighted Downvotes = Theft" is too ridiculous to be rewarded on par with other content. Other people are free to decide otherwise.
And regarding weighted power... I agree this is not ideal, but I can't think of any other solutions. Either the "best" guys have the most power, everyone is equal or something and between. In the former case there is at least some correlation between a person's (or, sadly, bot's) "quality", leaving abuse opportunities for "the rich", in the latter there are abuse opportunities if you manage to get a hold of a large number of accounts.
In my opinion the weighted option is better.