RE: Perhaps anarchy already exists and "THE COMMUNITY" is merely the highest manifestation of organized crime.
Are you saying that you believe that self defense is immoral?
A preemptive strike under the (sincere) pretense of "self-defense" is indistinguishable from pure aggression.
"Defense" =/= "Murder"
"Defense" =/= "First-Strike"
If I had the ability to clone the (open-source) steemit code and remove (or optionally reverse) rep (which is a purely "front-end" function) and add easy "steem-delegation" and "quick-tipping" buttons to every profile and post, I would do that.
Killing someone simply because you FEAR them leads to total chaos.
Chaos leads to Tribalism
Tribalism leads to Warring States
Warring States leads to GLOBAL DICTATORSHIP
If you thought I was going to kill you, and I knew that you believed in a "first-strike" policy, wouldn't that JUSTIFY me killing you FIRST because I have a "reasonable" belief that you will try to kill me first?
That moral-framework justifies practically all "first-strikes".
At least in the movies, a ("good") cowboy waited for their opponent to draw their weapon before shooting at them.
If a ("bad") cowboy SHOT-FIRST before their rival had drawn their weapon, they would be thrown in jail for murder and most likely hanged.
At least in that situation there was a clear consensus on the precise point at which shooting was justified.
Ideally, we'd have some sort of principled ("neutral") dispute resolution available to all citizens for any situation, no matter how petty they might seem. I'm developing this idea under the working title, Government As Referee Framework (GARF).
On steem, the solution is simple. MAKE WHATEVER RULES YOU WANT, BUT NEVER EVER TARGET SPECIFIC ACCOUNTS. THE SAME RULES APPLY TO EVERYONE, NO MATTER HOW BIG OR HOW SMALL.
For example, if "spam" is universally censored, then THERE SHOULD BE NO BANNER ADS and all forms of automatic responses should be treated exactly the same (like steemitboard spam) even if people like it.
(IFF) the coder gods believe in individual sovereignty (THEN) each account should be able to "mute" and or "screen" comments on their own blog, BUT NOT ON ANYONE ELSE'S WITHOUT THEIR EXPLICIT PERMISSION.
Wouldn't it be interesting if the blockchain was designed to disallow adding a comment or post that was a near duplicate of an existing comment or post, and instead would post a link back to the original? This seems like it would cut down on "blockchain-bloat" pretty significantly.
If someone runs toward you with a raised knife and you happen to have a gun, shoot them.
But if you think someone might maybe possibly stab you to death in your sleep, DON'T shoot them.
Shooting them should NEVER be your "first choice".
An early lesson from the Coen Brothers,
I also happen to believe that if you kill someone "in self defense" no matter the situation, you should still be charged with manslaughter.
It really makes no sense that if someone dies as the result of a pure accident, that somehow the "killer" is held MORE responsible than another "killer" who actively and intentionally chose to kill another person (in self-defense).
You have my wholehearted agreement.
However in the context of the Block-chain, there is no doubt in my mind that there is a chain of command who's intention from the beginning has been prevent any significant growth. This situation still needs to be dealt with. The last hard fork presents a unique opportunity to deal with it.
It a relief to see that the merky mark has restarted powering down his visible accounts. I suspect that there will be transfers to exchanges and then deposits into new accounts.
That phase gave me goosebumps.
You have my full attention, it is something that I have thought of many times during my time here and you have my full support. When will you be posting?
Did you notice we have lost the encrypted memo function ?
Just in case you are wondering I am not the murderous kind : )
I had a moment of sudden and great realization at the age of 9 which stopped me beating up the bullies at school.
WTF.
I'm developing this idea under the working title, Government As Referee Framework (GARF).
I'm still gathering data.
How would you describe your "Ideal Referee Government"?
Don't think too hard, just a "rough sketch", a "working theory" or "interim hypothesis" is all I'm looking for.
What do you think most people consider the "primary use case" for Government?
This post by @valued-customer may be of interest in that regard.
https://peakd.com/news/@valued-customer/censoring-hive-it-s-happening-right-now
To my way of think the first thing to do is articulate what real problems the platform faces, such as:
Plagiarism
Flagging for differences of opinion
Spam
phishing
Multiple accounts used for self voting. I know this happens but does it really cause harm to the platform?
Blatant dishonesty and making false claims against people. I have seen a lot of this against many people.
Censorship/denial of access to services for certain accounts. I am unable to vote, comment or access my wallet with the hive front end after a comment I made on Steemchillers post. I am sure people suffer that kind of abuse here
I am in favor of having a completely transparent system where any action taken against an account is clearly stated and can be clearly seen as justifiable.
I would also prefer a system with no flags and problems dealt with at the code level. That would require achieving community consensus on what is and what is not acceptable on the platform, and should also still require human action to enact any action against an account
I would be against policing things like low effort posts
And NEVER targeting specific accounts.
One LAW for everyone. 100% enforcement.
A "super-bully" (bully of bullies) can create an illusion of "stability", but it's ultimately unsustainable.
What did you decide was your "optimal course of action" when considering "the schoolyard bully problem"?
I always try to frame it as a chess game, "what's my best-move"?
I am still looking for an optimal course of action. I like NVC, not good at it in practice. It needs to be supported until it becomes habitual.
I love the idea of worker owned cooperatives. When I first discovered Steem I saw it as a way of funding such endeavors but soon realized it would be too easily attacked by the powers that run this place.
Please forgive me for giving you the background on where my violence came from and what ended it. My father was a very violent man and I witnessed my mother severely beaten several times. This is where my hatred of bullies came from and for some strange reason I have never had any fear in violent or potentially violent situations. Surprisingly that alone has kept me safe in some very challenging situations.
Anyway the old man did not want me to live under and delusions of how the world really operates. I was shown a graphic film of atrocities committed in India, in the interests of Empire.
The day my violence ended was a lesson. The lesson was about how great our Empire was and dealt specifically with our actions in India. I had already seen in graphic detail what we had done there. My class mates without exception as far as could tell, were overwhelmed with joy to learn of our supremacy. Me on the other hand, without any doubt was against this violence.
I realized:
I could not go along with it
I could not be a part of it.
Everyone around me was in favor of it
If I apposed it in the wrong way, with the wrong people, there are those who would not hesitate to kill me upon the command of another.
On account of my own violence, I was made Prefect a year early which gave me license to beat people up without suffering any negative consequences.
I realized that i was already part of their system.
I realized i needed to find another way to end the madness.
When I told my mother that I was afraid, she inquired ''what are you afraid of'' I was unable to answer her.
Did you ever figure out how to view your inbound messages?
If you have already entered the correct key the msg is visible