See, this is another area that causes problems. What exactly is enough to be called raping the reward pool? That phrase is thrown around by many but there is no definitive answer so no one puts much thought into it. The person I follow who was the one attacked so relentlessly, rarely had a post make more than $300 and many were only $20. But every single upvote was by a real person, not a bot. In my mind, if he is providing information good and detailed enough to have 30 or more people upvote him (again real people, not bots) should it matter how much he makes.
The other person has enough power on 40 or more bots, to downvote every single penny this person made and many of his followers. His stated reason was because the other person was raping the reward pool.
Every time one of his bots upvote one of the other bots it gives it more than $100 each time, is that not raping the reward pool.
The problem is, there needs to be a consensus as to what is allowed, and write the code to enforce it. This leaving it up to each individual to make their own decisions and giving them a system where they can easily abuse others, will do nothing but create an ever increasing number of people who will abuse the system out of greed, with no regard to what is best for Steemit.
I am not willing to put any more money into steemit as long as this can happen. I could put a lot more in, but I don't want to put money into a system where someone can so easily prevent me from earning.
I tend to put 4 to 6 hours into each post because I do my research to double check all the facts I have in my head and make sure every image I use is credited. That is a lot of effort to see one person wipe it out because they disagree with my post.
I guess when you are a victim of unfair vendetta from high ranked steempower user you can ask for help, i am sure a lot of people can start to upvote you to defeat the downvote, if the bad actors continue to bully you then the pool of "good actors" can directly downvote the bad one...I am sure we will stop the fight pretty quickly.
Community will always win.
Someone should take care of complaints and daily post about it, so we directly know wich user is "certified" in need to be helped.
I think, we don't need new code to take care of this problem simply organize the community in a better way.
How do you know who are the good guys and who are not. I am fairly new and don't have a very big following yet. My reach is very small and if every one of them joined together to try to stop them, it would barely be a smack on the wrist. Perhaps if we had a group working specifically to grow for this goal???
Someone would have to take this role in charge and do it seriously, this person would be paid by vote and the post would be view by the majority of the community who daily check all complaints and vendetta downvote activity. Each person could read the report and easily see with proof wich steemit user is unfairly bullyied by others and need help (vote tp counterdefeat the downvote).
Persons that often downvote for vendetta reasons would rapidly be flagged by the community.
It's is actually a great idea for someone to work and generate revenue helping the fairness of steemit community.
Who want to take care of it?