RE: Butterfly Effect: Steemit's Resident Troll @sneak Soft-Censored Me Today
This post is absolutely ridiculous. Flagging was built into STEEM for the very purposes of people disagreeing? Have you even read the white paper? Do you understand why flagging is important to the platform?
Literally BUILT IN FOR A REASON.......
Those reasons according to the creators of STEEM? Well, just check the prompt when you go to flag someone and it states the reasons. One of which is simple. "Disagreement on rewards."
Welcome to a decentralized platform where anybody can do anything. You can post whatever you want. Up vote whatever you want, and flag whatever you want....
That is kind of the whole point..... If you are getting flagged, there is probably a reason. Figure out the reason and make sense of it. If it doesn't make logical sense, ask for help from others.
It isn't a hard concept to wrap your head around. It's literally here for a big reason......
Thanks for your comment @biasnarrative. I do understand that downvoting was built into the Steem blockchain. However, the collapsing of flagged posts, and hiding of posts, and dithering effects that Steemit has added as a destructive flourish can be perceived as a form of soft-censorship. I think just as Steemit has chosen to add those things, they can simply remove those after effects of flagging.
Then all they would need to do is come up with a more reasonable solution to handle spam. People don't like it when they put allot of time and effort into a post only to see it dithered out and hidden on the Steemit UI. It connotes a strong feeling that they've been censored by another Steemian. In reality on the blockchain they haven't, but on Steemit it's a different story.
Steemit can really do the right thing if they wanted to, and make this platform a much more positive place.
My suggestions are to:
I do have one more suggestion which is a bit radical, but it might prove to be an interesting experiment. Even if it was only done as a trial-run.
The benefits to this kind of thing would be that Steemit could be percieved as a platform that doesn't discourage the free flow of diverse ideas.
Also, if the post has been downvoted to 0.00 on another UI maybe Steemit could show how heavy it was downvoted in sbd and maybe show a little flag icon, so that people know it was flagged and can choose to counter it, if they please.
I think Steemit could become a much more powerful community if it's users weren't attacking each other in flag wars. All we're doing is holding each other back with that kind of nonsense. If this experiment worked on Steemit, maybe other UI's like d.tube and the like would follow suit.
I don't know how radical the implications of these changes would be, but the whole thing is an experiment anyhow. I say why not try something to create more community unity. I feel like the design of this UI is almost setup to try and create an internet civil war or something. It comes off as very divisive.
Are those ideas unreasonable, if so could you explain why? I'm still learning, and love the Steemit platform, I just think that it has the potential to be better, and lead the way by setting a good example for all the other UI's.
One more point: "Disagreement on rewards."
Lets say that someone with a vote weight of $10.00 wants to reward person (A).
Then in comes person (B) who says; fuck person (A) and downvotes -$10.00.
It really makes no sense to me, If I want to reward someone for their hard work at this or that, then why should someone else be able to interfere with that action? Can you imagine if something like that happened in real life?
Imagine that you are competing in a marathon with three prizes for the winners.
You run hard, and you run fast, and to your amazement you finish in first place. Then the second place contestant finishes the race like 10 minutes behind you, and boy are they pissed. Just as the race officials are about to reward you with your Gold medal the extremely wealthy 2nd place contestant says hold up, I disagree!
Long story short, three hour marathon complete and nothing to show for it. I don't know @biasnarrative, the whole scheme just seems so bassackwards. Steemians would be far better off simply voting for what they want, vs. voting against content they don't like to hear.
I'm sure you've heard of people bitching about reward pool rape, but what about reward rape, it's just as ludicrous. If you ask me the whole damn system seems like it's meant to get people fighting with one another. I just don't see the logic.
I could see where it might be forgivable for a whale to engage in regular reward pool rape, just so that when they wanted to reward someone, they could send it directly via steem transfer, without dealing with the hassle of downvote wars.