You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: So I found a hobby downvoter.
No no, I understand what you mean, that a vote that low doesn't mean anything. But it's about the principle for me. I'm okay with people downvoting me, no problem, the problem starts when there is no valid reason behind it and it's just an downvote for the sake of downvote. And on top of that, it was on the post I most likely wouldn't want a downvote of any kind.
I see what you're saying, but my reaction comes from the absence of valid reason of downvoting, not the value.
Also, there is this Steemer, forgot its name, who is mad at @cyberdemon531 for some weird reason, and downvotes everything @cyberdemon531 uploads. That also gets me mad.
That's why I agree camille trolling!
...But cyberdemon is doing much worse than camille. I didn't find any flags on her posts, but she's certainly deserving some. Lijke she's being told - she doesn't have a clue of what she's talking about and she's attacking the other guys. When it comes to her, this is just Déjà vu, though.
Her and me, we disagree, certainly, no questions. Still I would downvote her post. If she did attack others, like in, downvote others and belatenly lie about others, then I would have a problem. Insulting others is not a reason unless its consistent. But I don't see any of that.
But if you didn't find any flags, that is good, then the others stopped downvoting her post.
It was clearly consistent.
Yeah, well, I just read her latest post, I did commented in it, and there she insult the commenters before they even comment. Still a character flaw yes, but eeeh ... I don't know, I don't feel like downvoting.
I think I'm just too forgiving. But not if someone breaks the NAP btw, then they can die for all I care, because they deserve it.
Downvoting is truly a valid option in that situation. What's NAP?
I actually upvoted the post.
The NAP is the Non Agression Principle, that is what capitalist or anarch capitalist use a the law. It means that you can not damage, have or use property of someone else without their permission. Your body also count as property. Also you can not stop a persons freedom of movement unless they want to step on your land, because they will be trespassing then.
Then I generally disagree with this "NAP" thing as a whole. Now that I know about it, I am anti-NAP. It attempts to oversimplify every situation.
Damnit, I got angry when I read this, enough to miss the timing on the curation window. Fuck.
Wait what ? Curation window ?
A lot of people don't like the NAP just for that reason. But for the same reason, that is why I like the NAP. Nobody should tell me what I can and cant do, and the NAP insures that, if you don't mess with me, I don't miss with you. But most people understand this NAP all wrong. It doesn't mean it is an ultimatum, it is just the foundation for all the rules. You can have for a example, a gun free zone in a world were the NAP is existing, if the people who own the land all agree on that. The NAP ensures that nobody is forced to agree on that. In this world, you can be forced to do or act in a way that you don't want, but the NAP ensures that they need your consent first.
PS: I felt like downvoting that post when I read you upvoted it. I probably would have done that if I didn't want to recharge my VP as much as I do now.
I just keep returning back to, "that is bad, but", argument.
Which is exactly why it's an option, not something mandatory.
I know I know. I just don't like the downvote in general. I think that not upvoting is good enough.