You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: How Good Person Tokens could lead to censorship
If you, or a group that you are a part of, feel thwarted by STINC Policy, then there is nothing stopping such a group from handling the input and delivery of content on the blockchain differently as the code is open source and the database is distributed. Imagine Busy Darknet 2.0. 😎
P.S. Perhaps better than Good Person would be Community Exceptable Behavior. Less judgemental and allows evolution over time.
P.P.S Self voting was removed a few forks ago and then returned. Rumour is that it is removed in the next fork again.
thanks for pointing that out, but guidelines have nothing to do with code. they can't define spam or other 'bad code' in meaningful detail. they're general terms that are subjective to interpretation. it's why we don't trust governments and banks.
if we have a bunch of individuals going around finding 'bad actors', they'd have different results. but yes they'd overlap on some of the most obvious ones. but the community's already kinda doing that. steemit inc should be included as one of those individuals. but it shouldn't be the big boss telling us what a 'good person' is.
Hopefully it will be community driven with community concensus as to what is exceptable.
yup let the community do it 👍