I think the platform is way too young with too few content providers to start limiting content and moving to reduce content. If anything we should be doing the opposite. There will come a time when the community is large enough to address issues of abuse. We are far from that point.
The issue as I see it is the abusive down voting, not excessive posting... I check this site a few times a day and see no new posts, or the same old posts for a large portion of the day.
We should reward people that provide 10+ posts since they are doing the heavy lifting.
I'm not sure I agree that it is difficult to provide 10 posts with good content if you are doing this full time... and there is no reason to assume a single account is controlled by a single person, it can be a team of writers working in the background. If CNN can do 24 hours of news 24/7 surely a couple of people in a room somewhere can average 1 post every 2.5 hours. Do not see this as an issue worth any attention until the gap (lack of content) is addressed. Let these guys post as they wish, and let the followers decide if the content is worth reading.
Good point indeed , so let the whale war continue, all should close their eyes and let the current issue resolve itself because there is no issue or solutions to the issues?
no, we should attempt to find a resolution that doesn't punish content providers. perhaps rethink the down voting ratio... we should also introduce residual income for content so you can upvote after 7 day if the content is really great to increase the circulation of the really good content for longer than 7 days.