You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Steemit Flag Wars: You don't have to flag anyone if you don't want to. Help the Steem community to survive by using your power to HEAL.
I'm one of the 'little guys' (and a Red Cross volunteer in real life btw). I wouldn't have discussed the idea with the cards that openly if I had had it at all. Could have been guessed that not everybody would take it easy. The post seems to have got about 200 Steem Dollars to be paid out though. That's probably more than I will ever receive here. Thus it's not that much 'David against Goliath'-like as it may seem. The author of the MTG cards post is not a little child who needs guidance.
Besides, I'm not responsible for anybody other's income, or am I?
Nobody needs to stick to this platform if he doesn't like to.
The MTG post was used as an example of how much a community support may help others, since after the fact, lots of big players jumped in to defend him.
He may not be the smallest user around, but what about the really small users that posted an honest well funded opinion about anything related to the flag war (no matter wich side he was in)?
I saw the beggining of it, and people defending both sides got flagged hard only because they expressed their opinion on the matter.
It is not about guiding anyone. It is about reducing the damage on the community as a whole.
If you don't have a community, the steem tokens wont be worth anything. And i bet that is something no one that uses the platform want to see it happening.
And no, you are not responsible for anybody income, but may choose to be responsible for the welfare of the whole community.
Actually, those who hold more STEEM should be the most interested on keeping this platform in good health.
STEEM is a inflationary coin, with means that if no one use it, the supply will increase over time, wich means it will have less value. The only way too keep STEEM prices high is to keep people interested in using it.
In the end, everyone loses if more people exit steem than the amount of people entering it.
I just read the comment by @swissclive. Maybe I didn't know enough at first. I'm just to fond of myself when I scent a chance to express new views on a topic. So maybe everything below this line is pure bullshit or no valuable contribution ...
If the bigger users are up to destroy their playground because their money is safe anyway ... shrug
Social media is about business these days. Not about letting everyone speak on every topic in epic width or something that comes close to it.
Second, it's a kind of infrastructure. Infrastructure may change. High emission cars may be blocked from cities. A tree which has enlighted the sight on a railway route may fall onto it and block it. Who's suffering then? Not the managers or founders. Can they go and saw the tree into pieces themselves? No, they will use money to pay someone for that service or rely on public government to fix it. Who will be blamed for the delay? The people who didn't remove the tree in time. (Those are mostly volunteers leaving their office, at least in Germany.)
In fact, it's always the minnows who suffer. Humans don't act differently just because it's online. Au contraire, they are more and more rude, each of us gets more rude and impatient, even in real life.
We have some broken governments all over the world. What does stating "they should" help? Nothing at all. There's too many people having different views on how things should have done (for example: with refugees) and in the end nothing is done at all because the arguing parties are not able to come to compromise because of the damage any decision causes.
What I understand is: those flags might have been used to make people stop arguing. There was no other powerful way to address them all at once. As a means of communication this site has some heavy disadvantages. You cannot send private messages and you cannot pin entries or give comments a higher rating so that those are more prominent to the viewer.
If you want to establish a new neighbourhood you can restrict the houses to be built to a certain kind or form or you can permit everyone to find an architecture at his own wish. Which is better for the community? I have seen both in my former hometown.
I don't think it helps a community to give everyone the chance to express himself to the fullest. Sad but true.
You do have some valid points, and i agree that a minimal structure in any kind off society is needed to avoid full chaos and extinction.
But when we are living into the playground we should just shut our mouth and let him do whatever he wants? I don't think so.
There will always be people holding more power than others on every kind of community (be it money, military, influence, etc), but what matters in the end is what is done with that power.
In the end, no one can force anyone to do anything. But, the minimum that must be done by us is to try to offer possible solutions, and hope that the one those with power listen to what we are saying.
As long as it is not something that incite hate, evil or anything similar, yes, every voice must be allowed to be heard. Not matter if its something smart or stupid.
People may only do fully concious decisions if they are able to acess all information on the subject.
Thank you. (I'm too tired of the day to write more but there's not much more to say either.)