Either that, or it is you who is biased and he has been fighting against that bias. His opinion could very well be worthwhile, I can't tell either way from what you just said.
And I am still confused; what exactly is @blocktrades doing wrong? How is he supposed to be abusing the system and how does he benefit? I don't ask that because I think he doesn't, I have no opinion either way, I would just like to know. I'm relatively new here, you see.

Sure - a lot of users upvote garbage content. A lot of users also upvote plagiarized content. The problem here is determining whether or not this is intentional and malicious or if it's just bad curating habits. I'm not seeing any proof of the former, yet this feels like it is an accusatory post despite the lack of evidence. 

As demonstrated in another comment, the percentage of this bad curation is fairly low. And when he is reached after plagiarism is found, he appears to unvote the posts. 

You know I have no problem with calling out whales, but this post is lacking anything concrete.

>No other whale has this pattern of voting.

However no other whale could manage to be equally effective in curation  )

@ats-david, yes, he usually unvotes when reached, the problem is, that he upvotes plagiarized content even AFTER there were left a comment about the plagiarism from Steemcleaners. 
I have no problem with unintentional upvote of plagiarism and then removal of an upvote, but if therealready was a comment from Steemcleaners, or if it's garbage content... It's at the least highly irresponsible, and with power of his that's an issue. 
He had some time to find and downvote this article, why doesn't he do the same with his upvotes? Sad.