"...that's healthy and people should get used to some downvotes..."

All sorts of philosophical attempts to change human nature have done the same, and failed equally. Hive user retention is demonstrably abysmal, and this is why. Hive utterly fails to enable folks to get paid for their content because economic suppression of the subjective valuation of society of that content is censorship, and this mistaken philosophical attempt to change human nature simply fails to meet human needs.

Hive's premise is that creators can be rewarded for their content by peers. DV's, and particularly DV campaigns that zero out returns permanently - which continue today on Hive - utterly belie that premise. It is hardly conspiratorial to note that 3 dozen accounts have maintained a majority of Hive stake for seven years and oligarchical centralization of governance is the result of 'adjusting rewards', which is simply punitive taxation and censorship that drives people off the platform.

It doesn't matter how convincing you sound, how reasonable and logical your arguments seem to you. The market has rejected them, and until that BS is abandoned Hive will remain financially centralized and fail to enable free speech that has never been more desperately necessary as censorship eliminates free speech across the West.

The fact is that upvotes and no votes are opposites. Curation is the opposite of no curation. DV's are identical to taxation in effect. They produce identical results commercially, utterly repressing economic activity, preventing growth, and centralizing assets. Enabling unrestrained taxation by any and every party on Hive completely and for absolutely sound reasons cripples the social media mechanism and obliterates forthright speech.

These are the demonstrable results Hive has achieved in seven years of operations, and refusing to adapt operations to market responses is the quickest route to the end of Hive.