Great to hear.
Yes, one of the, if not main reason transaction fees were brought on was to prevent abuse and spam "attacks", in fact it was the reason.
While a good solution no doubt, it brought in other issues in that 99% of the population doesn't like fee's, on a chain that has great tech and is a standout from other chains(in its free and fast transactions).
Abuse spam is a serious problem and it was a good solution(tx fees), a good measure at that time.
But With
So the problem is that the spam fills up the chain and makes it more difficult to operate nodes. So spam limits growth over time.
I am strongly of the opinion that blacklisting needs to be done at the chain level.
We can't have free accounts.
The reason we can't answer your accounts is fairly simple, The namespace will get all spammed up and become an additional attack vector for blurt.
Free transactions are not a feature, they're a bug.
Free transactions made rate limiting necessary, and introduced a whole new layer of voodoo economic crap. just for example, the resource credit system or the bandwidth system before it. Neither of them really works right and they're not fair. How are they not fair? Well with per kilobyte or per transaction fees, everyone pays the same for everything.
Your third point is interesting. I like that idea, and I would like to see things like that explored. With that said, we might need to look into making that affect both voters and posters. voters should not earn curation rewards under a certain threshold level and posters should not earn post rewards under a certain threshold level.
Except then blurt the coin functions differently for different parties, which I do not feel is desirable.
Whar I do want to say is very nice work on your two front ends, they are steadily improving.