Hello dear friend @celestal.
It's been amazing these past few days, and these events have only made me more bullish about Steem, and I cannot be but grateful.
Recently I felt the same way, since I experienced a similar situation where I was a victim of unfair downvotes. But then this became a rewarding experience when I received full support from the community.
I have come to think that downvotes in the hands of the community in general where it is the guarantor of controlling abuse and shitpost, became a utopia. I think it's too much power to be in the hands of the crowd.
What do you think of the creation of an agency (similar to the witnesses) within the blockchain that will be in charge of giving downvotes?
All best, Piotr.
I don't think that makes sense. The community itself needs to filter content (downvotes are part of the process), a few selected ones simply cannot do that with big volume, and it also takes away from the diversity of preferences. What we have now with the community guarding itself is exactly what we want and needed. There are and will be bad apples for sure, but the good is outweighing the bad by orders of magnitude. And if those few bad actors give unjust downvotes, destroying a single user, the community steps in to counter that if they see the downvote unjust – that is exactly what proof-of-brain is about: public negotiation on rewards. But if you want, you can still give the authority of downvotes to someone you trust, like @curangel which is a curation project, but also uses downvotes to users selected by the delegators.
Thx @celestal
After second thought, I actually agree that this idea wouldn't make much sense.
Thank you for taking the time to reply. Appreciate it :)
Cheers, Piotr