Take this as you will (I suspect it will be with a flag), but the way you and Steemd handled the entirely legitimate criticism about content quality in the thread about poker (and not just from me, from many others) is what convinced me that something untoward was going on. I was on chat speaking out against harassment and verification nazis for weeks before it even became an issue with msgivings.

I really really wish the many critics of these accounts would make the debate about post quality (and i think theres a legitimate debate to be had there, though you obviously don't want to hear that one either.) and not some made up requirement for identification.

The whole issue, IMO, goes back to certain then successful authors deciding that flagging overvalued posts and or talking about content value vs reward was somehow tantamount to abuse.

But, since you people don’t want to mind your own business, here is @honeys posts in regards to it.

I don't have any problem with something like that. But, having acted deceptively (and she was most certainly acting deceptively even if her motives were benign) its not really fair to expect people to give you the benefit of the doubt when your deception is .

The way people reacted upon discovering one person pretending to be 2 and astroturfing a post is, or should have been, entirely forseeable.