You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: A life of ethics and Steemit...lets get fundamental.....philosophy ...part 5
You don't seem to understand what consent is in this context, and that is where all ethic arguments begin and end at.
You then don't understand the concept of ethical principle. Context is irrelevant.
You also don't seem to understand that property can be un-property as you put it. A basic example of this is donating and gifting something.
Incorrect.
Donating a gift then gives the receiver of that gift that property previously owned by the giver of the gift.
Ownership of property is maintained.
Not if it's given up to nobody in particular.
In this case the fisherman can go and release all fish into a pond that nobody has claim to.
Posted using Partiko Android
..given to nobody , means is free to be claimed by anybody. It belongs to no one.
It is not someones property any longer.
The property produced by the witness ( a paid contract) is deposited n the reward pool - but belongs to no body.
Everyone can take it (the more stake the more they can take).
This is not a free market mechanisms - people are not exchanging goods or services for a product that they own.
No one owns the reward pool steem.
Exactly, you claimed that there is no such thing..
That does not mean it's unethical, as no property rights are violated.
People exchange their voting power/curating for steem that is created directly for them to do so.
Posted using Partiko Android