Balanced points raised in both content and comments, down-voting may have a place for people who constantly abuse if/when used wisely, this should not be allowed to be entered into the blockchain without good reason with a comment to the perpetrator.
Ad-hoc down voting should never be allowed this is just my opinion.
Yes... down voting is a really useful tool... however at the moment, only some accounts employ the vision and wisdom to employ it as a useful tool, rather than a sledgehammer for all occasions!
I spent a couple of hours yesterday going through those I followed over the past 3 years, start clearing out dead wood. Obtaining realistic figures is never how many it is quality, sometimes downvote with comment may go a long way to assisting some to adjust their thought on how to use the platform.
... yes, not a problem unless you are the unfortunate ant!
Anyway, although the out of context statistic is interesting... what is it based upon? Is it weighted by stake or number... the outgoing and incoming accounts... all these little details are a bit important. A 0.5% of all downvotes by itself is the sort of thing is most beloved of marketers and politicians!
It sounds good, but vague numbers is a great way of hiding detail.
Thanks, I will see if I can find further details, or if anyone has published anything more recently. However, I do still hold that it is nigh on impossible for an account to defend against a committed downvoter (of significant stake, not the little bot ones..). The only way is to weather it out and hope that others find it worthwhile to help (out even notice...).
Also possible, but that at least doesn't detract from the rewards of the author.. and it can be reported to steemcleaners, who have the backing and reputation to dent the spammer. Plus, spamming that gets overwhelming would also attract the attention of larger accounts as it does slow the network down!