Good thoughts. There is a disbalance here that would be nice to see alleviated. Because of the design, it's not going to happen unless those who are able to downvote become more aware of the subjective value vs. content value. I don't agree with the idea of changing how the payouts are affected. Folks invested knowing that this would be part of their payoff. To strip that from them is, IMO, disingenuous at best.
Part of the problem is that value is often being related to other payouts, not the actual content. This is one of the reasons I've stopped writing much. It's just not worth my time, though I am trying to help in other ways.
This is not coming from a blogger who simply likes to see their writing published, but from a freelance writer who's been paid hundreds of dollars for single articles in the real marketplace. Some of my posts are worth $5, but I want to share so I do. Others have been worth a couple hundred. Some received what they were worth. Some received more. Most received far less.
I do enjoy the freedom of writing about whatever I want though. As a freelancer, you can't really do that. You have to please one main editor. So there is a tradeoff.
In this case, IMO, those who downvote should first learn what value really means in the writing world. When an article that has great content gets knocked down from $50, that's simply unrealistic. Few good articles are worth less than $50. At times they might be because they're super brief or contain more quotes than created content. Most excellent content, especially well-thought, studied and presented clearly, if over 1,000 words or so, is worth over $100 in the writing world.
And, like you said, a thoughtful downvote will also take note of the writer's past. If they've done poorly on good content and finally got one to break through, congratulate them rather than punishing them. Regardless of the intent, it still feels like getting a whipping for doing a good job and persevering. And there are only a handful who are responsible for this. Regardless of whether it's their right because they hold SP (and I agree that it is their right under the current model), it IS sad to see, not very responsible and clearly hurting the platform.
I won't name names, because I do think it's been used well in some cases and I honestly don't follow the drama closely. OTOH, I hope they'll step back and consider how it's affecting the value of Steem and the health of the community.