As I already told someone else here, mass tagging is a consequence of downvotes, not the reason they exist ;)
This post would have been flagged 99% of the time anyway, like everything else that mentions blurt, whether tagging was used or not, as I have plenty of experience with this topic.
Usually, a post unwanted by a group has no effect here on Hive because it doesn't even see the light of day before some annoyance like Marky Marky flags it, using his one and only opinion out of his ass that something simply isn't worth paying attention to. Even though there are other groups here that would consider this post valuable, this approach only creates situations where users create more fake accounts to milk Hive for cash and don't run it seriously because it could always be flagged. Facebook already provides a greater degree of autonomy for promoting various projects than hive, opportunities for monetization, because maybe you didn't get tokens but your post ale not hidden for others due to dovnvotes, which is ironic for platform who start as web3 and free speech platform ;]
Just look at the evolution of the @blurt.media account. Initially, it simply syndicated videos on Hive, just like on Blurt, to gain reach for their authors. It didn't use inappropriate tags or clutter any space. However, leading Hive downvoters considered this spam because, as we know, users don't have their own brains and have to decide for them what is spam and what isn't, so they started downvoting everything equally, regardless of quality or value, with a downvoting trial. This approach led authors to start using tags that allow them to acquire second-layer tokens, and the "Sports" tag and others became cluttered. Many users who supported Blurt Media had a lot of Sports tokens and, wanting to continue supporting authors, agreed to do so through L2 tokens. So what? Did the downvotes help? Well, they didn't just cause more chaos, and the Sports interface looks like Blurt Media's :P
And what about spam? And yes, the mass tagging I first used here as an experiment has already achieved devastating success, and not even a day has passed and downvotes haven't changed anything :P Many people seem to rant and spit in the comments, but those interested have their own minds and don't care. They're quietly interested in the message and asking for more.
And so, in this case, there are people who have already expressed interest in their Blurt airdrop, and there are also those who ask about the account. And this is the quintessence of censorship: downvotes. They help fight nothing but opinions that differ from the majority and enforce the single correct narrative.
This post is living proof that downvotes don't solve any spam problems, but lead to spammers resorting to increasingly annoying and sophisticated methods, such as creating disposable accounts and other abuses.
This, in turn, will force a reaction from the community, which will continue to tighten various functionalities, making the interfaces increasingly inconvenient for ordinary users :P
Decent users, in turn, continue to be silenced and demonetized for their views and unable to freely express their opinions. This is a vicious cycle. Your Web 3 releases are becoming worse than Web 2 ;] Everyone on Blurt understands this perfectly, so instead of bashing, we discourage abusers and present better options.
The true face of mass downvotes is shown here, not just in the articles themselves, but in the profile's history and its entire context.
https://peakd.com/hive/@khrom/why-downvotes-contradict-decentralization-a-mathematical-perspective
The author didn't mass-tag anyone, didn't express himself vulgarly, and didn't plagiarize work. He didn't self-proclaim; he simply expressed his factual opinion on the topic of taboo. His profile was aggressively downvoted, and his reputation, around 60, was reduced to 3. This is the real reason why downvotes exist. It's not about fighting spam. It's about silencing inconvenient opinions and concentrating power.