(1) If you assume that whoever's downzapping is also the one mass boosting their own items
(2) Then you can infer the downzapper by looking at the most widely boosted items (since a person can only boost their own posts)
I don't know if this would be considered a privacy breach? It relies on an untested assumption (1), and public information (2). And it's all pseudonymous anyway.
I think he's saying that
(1) If you assume that whoever's downzapping is also the one mass boosting their own items
(2) Then you can infer the downzapper by looking at the most widely boosted items (since a person can only boost their own posts)
I don't know if this would be considered a privacy breach? It relies on an untested assumption (1), and public information (2). And it's all pseudonymous anyway.