Why would they be discouraged if the comment vote makes up for the downvote on the post? Are you trying to be difficult on purpose at this point? That was literally what my original question/idea pointed to.
It is so interesting that you accuse me of being hypersensitive, Acidyo. If I choose to be difficult with you, you will know.
So, there is a post. It gets DVed. No comment yet exists. Author may or may not make a comment to UV. That's the mechanical problem as I understand it.
A comment isn't too hard to come to existence if you ask them after you downvote followed with a short explanation as to why. Yeah dunno, not interested in discussing things with you in the future if this is how you go about things.
Listen... if God or my earthly father didn't want to talk with me, that would be a problem. You, sir, not wanting to talk with me after catching an attitude because I wouldn't instantly tell you how great your idea is, but had mere questions?
But if it is not the author's fault, that is not where the force needs to be applied. Hive has great developers -- I say again, can someone on Hive.blog or PeakD jigger with the Trending algos, perhaps, so that big upvoted posts from certain known trails don't dominate?
Fidgeting with the trending list doesn't change "shitposts" getting too much rewards. The idea is to punish the blind/auto voters only without the drama of authors feeling like you took something from them if you give them a comment vote instead.
The only person behaving in a dramatic way, throwing accusations of overly emotional behavior around, is you, Acidyo.
Now you have added a detail: if you ASK for a comment, it indeed will be there, but you did not say that at first.
As for punishing people who are auto-voting ... basically, is what you are getting at is messing up their money by shifting the money to the comment? This would mean that you and "fren" have got to ask and explain on every post ... complicates your workload.