Negative voting (downvoting) should be removed from the Hive blockchain and Hive blog platform. Users should only be able to upvote content they value or cast neutral (zero-weight) votes. If the community majority prefers to keep downvoting, then any negative vote should require a mandatory public explanation or comment—something simple but traceable, like a short reason tied to the vote—to discourage anonymous abuse and promote accountability.
I don't believe Hive is dying; quite the opposite—in my view and based on my research, it's actually flourishing. The platform continues to attract dedicated users, developers, and real-world utility in a decentralized ecosystem. That said, powerful stakeholders in the Hive community (whales or coordinated groups) shouldn't be able to unilaterally devalue or suppress content they personally disagree with, especially when downvotes can sometimes target legitimate opinions, creative posts, or dissenting views rather than just spam/plagiarism. True decentralization means the platform should be run autonomously by its users through transparent, fair mechanisms—not weaponized voting that chills participation or drives away creators.
Hive's strength lies in its pure decentralized blockchain model, where governance and curation emerge from collective user stake and voluntary curation, not punitive tools that can be gamed or used for personal vendettas. Removing or heavily restricting downvotes (or at minimum requiring justification) would better align with those ideals, encourage more organic growth, and help sustain long-term engagement without sacrificing quality control.