RE: Two proposed HF policy change for countering reward based abuses.
While I am personally 100% in support of users rights to self-vote, I would be very much open to a hardfork where this functionality was removed. - not that it would do anything.
In the system, as it is currently designed, self-votes are useful and important curation decisions. Think of this as putting your money (vests) where your mouth is (posts). While some users do not like this practice, the way the (abet complicated) rules have consented to today, self-votes are absolutly ok. Because of the curation incentives, users should be curating their own content.
Your solution can easily be Sybiled, no matter how implemented. You can always just delegate SP.
I think people need to get over the whole self-voting thing. Either vests are vests or not. This "author vests shouldn't count" talk really does not make much sense.
Edit: I am going to spam this thread with links to more of my thoughts on self-votes. This thread was the inspiration for authoring the post and I believe many here might be interested.
Agreed and "Hate Speech" is very subjective. I can say that if you call me a "ROBBER," then that is hate speech and that hurts me. You could say those are the facts. I could say I was Aladdin or Batman or Dexter. I could say I was Robin Hood or Obama. I could have excuses or reasons. I believe in objectivity. I believe in freedoms of speech which includes the freedom of hate speech because hate is a subjective abstraction that is based on opinion and feelings and stuff. When police put bad people in jail, they could say to them, "That is hate speech." But, if a man murdered your mother. You could say, "You murdered my mother." But he could say, "Hey, that is hate speech. Do not say that. I am not a murderer." So, I am saying, I do not like government.... smaller government is better than bigger government... I like capitalism..... I like choices and responsibilities.... I like Bitcoin and Steemit... thanks for sharing....
Cheers