Is it censored?
Censorship
I just read a post claiming censorship from being flagged. This is always a bit of a touchy subject here since people think that freedom of speech comes with freedom from consequence and although I don't think anyone should flag without a decent reason, I can't see how flags are censorship.
censorship
ˈsɛnsəʃɪp/
noun
the suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security.
"the regulation imposes censorship on all media"
Now, that is the definition of censorship yet, I don't see how flags can be that. Yes, a flag (or enough flags) can potentially grey-out a post but, even then the posts are available and with a click or two, completely viewable. They are not really hidden at all and will forever reside on the blockchain with only a Hardfork able to remove them which requires witness approval as far as I know. This means that there is freedom of speech here and there is not censorship other than the self-censorship people experience.
Flags
Now, as far as flags themselves go:
Flagging a post can remove rewards and make this material less visible. Some common reasons to flag:
- Disagreement on rewards
- Fraud or Plagiarism
- Hate Speech or Internet Trolling
- Intentional miss-categorized content or Spam
This is the suggested uses of flags but on a blockchain with freedom of speech and no censorship, anything the code allows is possible (of which we are all too well aware) and suggestions are just that, suggestions. No one is forced to flag nor, are they forced to follow the suggestions about flags. Blockchain freedom. Well, as free as your own self-censorship allows.
This is the same for earnings as again we are aware as until they are yours (after payout) they are not yours. They are potential earning only. Most people tend to censor themselves and not post 'freely' because they want to earn something at the end of the week and approaching some topics, groups and people poorly will likely eventuate in some kinds of flags. But again, the flags aren't actually censorship and they do not infringe on freedom of speech. You are free, speak.
But, there is in general, consequences to speech of all kinds and some people who are either insensitive or hyper-sensitive can exact brutal costs if their position is threatened. Some might just do it for the fun of it. But at Steem at least, there is no cost paid by the person to receiving flags however, there could be cost of future rewards, support and of course, reputation. Reputation is not the person and to identify with it as if it is is egotistical at best.
So, post whatever you want but, the blockchain will record it for posterity, you need not fear censorship. At least, not yet.
Reputation damage
One thing I would like to change here though is the protection of reputations from flags on accounts that are above certain thresholds, for example the most esteemed, supreme leader of Steem and the Universe with the highest reputation the platform has ever seen of, 80.049. It is ridiculous that just because he is above a certain level, his rep is untouchable. It makes even more of a mockery of the reputation system than the artificial inflation by bidbots:
"I am very reputable, if I do say so myself."
Perhaps @timcliff could put in a pull request or whatever is required to remove the protections on reputations so that there is a chance to regulate some of the nonsensical views seen. It might then be possible to actually configure some interfaces later to use the reputation for filtering purposes, the way it always should have been.
In conclusion
To finish up, as much as I disagree with people just flagging content because they don't like what it says, currently the code allows so, get used to it because most people play the code, not the ethical implications.
You can post what you want freely but there are consequences to your words/actions. This might cost you or, it might help you.
In general, if you approach topics openly and earnestly, it is very rare you will ever get flagged. Those that get flagged are usually in some way looking to incite a strong reaction from people and when they get it, complain. The funny thing is that the person who complained about being censored is still able to post whatever they want. They are not oppressed, they are not beaten, enslaved, caged or murdered for having their views. They are free to speak.
Having said that, come on @dan, was that post really worth a flag? Everyone has their priorities.
Back to work to make some money to pay debts <<< Real censorship.
Taraz
[ a Steem original ]
Categorically no - flagging is not censorship.
I recently had a discussion with @valuedcustomer which I'll replicate excerpts of here, apologies for this laziness 😜 but it's on point:
If you read the exchange you see that the argument was made against my position that steemit.com can be considered a public forum, and thus qualifies for some free speech protections instead of as a private forum. But even so, the representation of flagged posts on steemit.com does not constitute censorship, regardless of their private / public status. Here's my argument:
We need to be careful to differentiate between steemit.com run by Steemit Inc. and the STEEM blockchain though. All of this is not to say that steemit.com does not censor specific posts. I have it on good authority (and it is up to any reader here to independently verify this) that Steemit Inc. has responded to requests to take down content which violates US law, so that is straight up censorship.
In the end we need to see that as censorship and stop muddying the waters with this visibility prioritizing butthurt, which I strongly suspect is more about the rewards than the actual visibility in most cases.
Do Steemit Inc. have the right to censor posts? Well, conversely they actually have the legal responsibility to do so! Such is the world we live in. However, and this will be true unless there is a major hardfork changing it, the Steem blockchain is censorship resistant to it's core.
Thanks, that is a very good overview that people can get a clear understanding of several aspects of censorship. Obviously, you have thought it through more than me :)
I think that most of the calls of censorship here are either over rewards like you say or the feelings of being repressed, the ego. It is not that the flagging couldn't have a censorship effect but, it would be self-censorship making it something different again.
Right, and those feelings come from entitlement in my estimation. That's another problem much discussed, much lamented, not much changed 😅
The content is always on the platform, but that doesn't mean there aren't degrees of censorship. Votes give visibility. You can get voted to visibility in the trending page for example. A powerful flag will remove that visibility, and censor your visibility. If your post goes grayed out, that censors visibility more. A flag of power acts as a form of condemnation.
Yet, 1 moment later the post can be reposted, updated, spammed, resteemed etc. The flag is more of a personal critique than censorship as there is zero stopping the idea itself from being spread again and again, even by the original poster.
Condemnation is not censorship, it is condemnation and even though a powerful flag or who flags it can influence an audience, it isn't actually hidden and there is no damage done or act to limit expression of the person themselves. It will likely change behaviours though but, this is again based on something that a person can influence.
condemn (v.)
early 14c., condempnen "to blame, censure;"
The words censor, censure and condemn share commonality. Censoring is condemning without speaking, by hiding it. Censure and censor have the same root in Latin.
When a book is censored, it's not desired to be read, but people can read it anyways. I made a post that was on trending, and smooth didn't think it helped attract new users so he censured it's exposure to prevent more people from reading it from a higher visibility it had. If you repost content after getting flagged, the person following you will just flag you more, and tend to penalize other posts because you dare to defy them. Then other people will get angry because you are spamming the chain with the same post. Condemnation grows.
That's playing very very loose with definitions, completely to the contrary of establishing any shared meaning context here.
That's playing very very loose with definitions, completely to the contrary of establishing any shared meaning context here.
This is true (though I think we need to be careful with the terms) and I know you have been on the receiving end of this kind of powerful condemnation, which was for the vast most part underserved in my opinion.
I think we need to be clear about what we mean by actual censorship and not be tempted by the myriad ways we can apply the term in spirit. For example, so-called "self censorship" is not censorship, it is like censorship so we can make a close comparison.
I see it as the way we can use a term like "death" for example. Death is a real thing, it is serious and (kind of) well defined. However we can say that someone who has a massive acquired brain injury has died as a person. This is a good comparison because they have changed so much so as to be a different person, which is like losing the old person completely, which is like death. But it is not death.
Similarly, causing someone to take an extended sabbatical from the platform because of (let's call it what it was) bullying is as close to censorship as for real censorship. But it's not completely the same thing, and shouldn't be treated as censorship. It should be treated seriously, I think it's a problem with the platform and one I'm not confident there's the will to solve, but it didn't actually stop you posting, it didn't remove your posts, it just made it socially and financially not really worth it.
For the record I'm glad you're back posting, though personally I'd like to see more on science and objective research than moralizing 😝
The dark side of flags is "revenge". It happened to me before and to many other users as well. If you talk about a sensitive subject or any kind of abuse that some abuser dont want to see, you get flagged. I wouldnt say for no reason, but for telling the truth or mentioning abusers in your post.
My main concern being that with a hard-fork it can be removed. Hence it is not immutable. Hence it is not decentralized in it's very sense.
I think that there has to be an option for this at least some way consideruing legal ramifications for things like child pornography and acts of revenge. In practice, i don't know how it will work.
I totaly get child pornografy and similar things and sadly i currently do not have a better solution how to counter this. But you do also understand that this harforking possibility means that the whole immutability and decentralization story is a piece of crap then...
Also by the way considering child pronography for example, photos are not stored on the blockchain yet, so can be deleted and offenders prosecuted. But i am realy sad to know that text can be erased by simple act of hardforking.
You are right, flagging is not censorship. There is a massive difference.
Most of us are luck to live in a world where freedom of speech is respected.
If you have free speech, it is inevitable that somebody will
say something you do not like. Just because you got your feelings hurt,
does not mean you need to punish the person who hurt them.
Sticks and stones... remember?
Words cannot hurt you, they cannot offend you, they cannot make
you feel bad about yourself, they cannot make you feel anything.
It is the meaning you derive from those words that make you feel anything.
If you are offended or hurt in some way by something somebody said,
flagging them does not fix the belief that caused you to derive the
negative meaning from those words. You would have fixed the
wrong problem. The problem that needs to be fixed
is the unhelpful belief that resulted in you feeling bad,
because one day somebody will say that to you face-to-face,
and you cannot flag somebody standing right in front of you.
I have seen 5 accounts so far in the past couple of weeks that only flag . Without posting or commenting these accounts are immune to repercussions . When flagging they do not give any reason .
This seems to be more of a vigilante style . I cannot see any advantage or positive contribution to the platform . Power without any control or restraint never has a good outcome .
I hope that this does not become a trend or the majority will be on bended knee
Depends on the accounts. you can DM me later with them if you want.
I don't think that I have flagged a post already. I did however flagged some comments in the past month but only comments with scamy links to external websites!
I don't see the use for flagging a post because it is bad content of does have an opinion which is the opposite of my opinion.
Most of the time, when I don't like a post I will move on and forget it!
Like you wrote, flagging does not only downvote the post, but also decreases the reputation of the author, which should be unrelated.
No I do remember that I have flagged 2 posts before. A friend of mine, does refer a lot in his posts to my steem name. Because of that Gina notified me, that I was mentioned in a post from an unknown author to me. Twice it was just a copy/paste of the orginal post. Both time I did downvote the post and did report it to steemcleaners.
So, yes I do flag posts apparently but not from a sensorship point of view, but based on copyright infringements.
Hahahah, the issue of flag was the first lesson I had to learn even before coming to steemit..
Many people are abusing the idea of falg, they flag you for no reason or for self interest.
I've never been flagged, probably because I don't always cross my boundaries... Hahahaha. But honestly, it is limiting people from visiting some topics.
People are already thinking of the negative consequences before acting.
Thank you for you always rock it... Smile
I think they should think a bit more about it too.
Sure, they should... Hahahahaha
No idea about the post you referred to ............so I can't really touch that. Apart from this, I think I have been flagged once here due to unintentional plagiarism. I totally deserved that.
Yesterday I came across a steemian being flagged by the cheetah bot for apparently being on its list. To be truthful I had no idea why she was being flagged because as far as I know her posts are pretty clean. She has been struggling for a week to get of the list, to no avail.
My only argument in favor of a flag is that since upvotes exist thus must the flags exist too. Together two of them keep the equation balanced.
".....people tend to censor themselves and not post 'freely' because they want to earn something at the end of the week and approaching some topics, groups and people poorly will likely eventuate in some kinds of flags. "
This is certainly true. I think flags act like more of a deterrent against plagiarism, hate speech, etc. Now after looking at the case of the above mentioned steemian who is being flagged (for reasons that I cannot comprehend) and then looking at the person whose reputation has crossed 80( this guy is now undeterrable).............. it calls into question a lot of things.
Similarly the matter of bloated reputation by bot voting seems really unreasonable. The whitepaper explicitly recognizes that loopholes are there and will be abused by the less conscientious and we can do nothing about it. At least the reputation score should be immunized against the bots if nothing else.
I agree that flags should exist. But they should mirror the mechanism for upvotes to make it equitable. We don't have a cap on how many upvote a user can receive, so why cap flag damage to reputation for those users?
Very fishy
People need to use them a little more on disagreements of rewards on some people.
No way flagging is censorship. Just no way. It may be a form of censorship but it is generally about preventing inappropriate content on the platform and not opinions (which is generally what censorship covers). That's the big difference
some people use them poorly but, that is to be expected considering, some people do just about everything poorly.