Well Gang he got me. Was worried for a while asked questions but never heard back. Anyhuh @GrumpyCat downvoted a post I used a 3.5 day+ bot on, even though the post was same day. I then called him a piece of shit and went on one of my rants. I also tagged all the non GC, Grumpycat, bots to inquire if they would insure against Grumpycat, none responded from what I saw.

As a Free Market guy, I like how Milton and Rose' son David Friedman discusses how in an anarchic society one could have polycentric law where there can be localities with and without the deathpenalty and when there is a conflict of laws/ jurisdictions one side could pay and compensate the other side for the interference with liberty. Perhaps the 5th Amendment was supposed to accomplish this?? at around 49 min and 50 sec

But so No bots have responded so looks like Grumpy Cat wins. I shall not purchase from bots that do 3.5+

Now we can get into the philosophy of it, but it looks like my opinion and power doesn't really matter yet, hopefully someday soon I will have Grumpy's power to cybernetically adjust steem to my desired targets subject to my perceived self interest/utility function and my values or whatever motivates me to move.

We can get into what Grumpy's goal might be, perhaps turn people off, or perhaps he really wants to accomplish his goal, or perhaps something more sinister. But facts is seems the rulers on steem have decided

"Anarchism- anarchy is a tendency in human development that seeks to identify structures of hierarchy, domination, authority and others that constrain human development. And then it seeks to subject them to a very reasonable challenge- it asks the structure to "justify it's self"! The structure should demonstrate that it's "legitimate"in special circumstances or conceivably in principal. And if it can't meet that challenge, it should be dismantled! Not just dismantled but reconstructed from below."

Noam Chomsky

For now seems Grumpycat has demonstrated his legitimacy. As publius Syrus asserted concerning the subject nature of value, looks like Grumpy is willing to pay more to have steem the way he wants it than others are willing to not have it that way.

"everything is worth what a purchaser will pay."

Now we could get into a much broader discussion of What steem should be and the nature of downvotes. I personally am opposed to most if not all downvotes. I think we should try to decide if steem is to be a marketplace of ideas/a currency/or some like publishing platform with a certain format. I think for all three the sooner we decide what we want steem to be the sooner things will become more regular and incentives for people to act in desired ways should be around more stable prices. If steem network goal is to be marketplace of ideas or currency, then I think best to just eliminate down votes except for spam. Downvotes hurt lots of innocents and can make people leave who could have been great additions.

Downvotes also break people down when steem in my opnion should build them up and catalyze voluntary association. If steem is to be a currency also think best to eliminate downvotes. Alternative I think what would be best is having different payout weights so if people identify purely investment 0 proof of brain they can do so safely at x weight, or people can do normal good quality posts at y weight, or not sufficiently good quality posts at z, and if people try to improperly self categorize their weights then take punitive action for defection in this prisoner's dilemma. Now if Steem is meant to only have sufficiently good content that metts certain expecations perhaps ok to have downvotes, but again I think my weighting system would be better and help create the desired incentives people claim they want.

Humans are very dumb and easily controllable. Perhaps instead of focusing on proper post payout amount or other nearly impossible things to objectively quantify an ontological artifact that is tied to a certain time/space. Perhaps we should focus on systemic level solutions to these problems.

The one thing I will say about these little experiments with people like Grumpycat is shows that people can affect structures and systems without coercion--unless you consider a downvote coercion, which I would not necessarily disagree with. But regardless, one thing statists misrepresent about reality is that autopoietic system like the beauty of the "invisible hand" do not necessarily lead to chaos everytime, and as frequently been shown via failed state interventions, centralized control especially for interventions like price setting often leads to the opposite effects like exacerbating shortages.

Thanks for your time and eyeballs. Hopefully we can help steem finally settle all these goddamned rules so normal people will join in mass. Even if it isn't 100% the way I want it, we need to clean up this ecosystem for mass diffusion and make whatever rules there are clear and as uniformly enforced as possible so they achieve the claimed point of rules which is to adjust and regulate conduct due to some set goal or value.