You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Spam report from a productive minnow on steemit. Please read. It's a very short post.
Yes, such things are very discouraging, especially for new members. Such comments could be easily avoided, if the article authors have comments moderation power and if the deleted by them comments negatively influence one's rating.
I resteemed your post, with just a few followers, this is not a big help, but they say that every little counts :-) Plus, this was my very first posting in the community.
Thank you and welcome to steemit!
Thank you for your concern. But comments moderation and deleting would defeat the purpose of steemit as a censorship free platform. Best solution is for those with steem power to flag the spammers, copy/paste content and "shit posts". This would lower the reputation of the bad actors while making their posts less visible. Flagging the spammers into oblivion is better than comment moderation. It's a little bit harder. But staying out of censorship is a must. That's why I'm trying to get more people to flag more content that diminish the value of the platform.
Thank you, I see your point. I am too new here to really discuss the issue, but I thought that as long as authors can write freely, it still will be a censorship free platform. And as to commenting, if one wishes to make his/her own strong point not acceptable to the author of the article, one could always express themselves by writing their own article on that subject.
It can be done. But it'll reduce the interactivity and it will especially kill the heated discussions. When designing one must regard the incentives and how humans would act. Make the best path the path of least resistance. When theft is more difficult than producing, even the bad actors will be forced to do good.
It's basically the good guys committing structural violence on the bad guys to make the bad guys act good and let the good guys act good much easier.
Don't worry about being new. I'm only 4 months old on steemit. I'll let you in on some further reading:
https://www.dashforcenews.com/6-ways-dash-uses-economics-solve-technical-problems/
https://www.dashforcenews.com/trolls-vs-users-limited-importance-online-communities/
https://www.dashforcenews.com/decentralization-centralization-can-get-along/
https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/89275.Fr_d_ric_Bastiat
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window
https://www.dashforcenews.com/bitcoin-disincentivizes-community-harmony/
Happy reading!
Thank you, I appreciate your posting the links for me and will do my best to look at all those articles tonight.
Yes, you are right,
the comment moderation could kill the heated discussions.
And as to the path of least resistance, usually, this is the best path in every business.
On the other hand, I can't help but ask if you have heard this quote from Henry Thoreau:
I am just trying to look at things from a different point, especially cause I have already skim here through a couple of discussions that went too hot, at least, in my opinion.
I was talking about using structural violence to "create" a path of least resistance. Why don't many people just go ahead and kill the people who hurt them instead of taking them to the co rut? It's because using the justice system is easier and less troublesome.
What if there was an army of flaggers waiting for comment spamming to be reported and start flagging the spam. At one point making productive comments would be much easier and risk free compared to spamming.
The point is we need to take control and "create" this situation as comment spamming isn't currently met with sufficient resistance. If murder isn't actively made harder than civilized justice, people will keep murdering.
The only other way to gain similar outcome is going full blown 1984 big brother state of constant surveillance.
My point is that the good path must be "actively" made less resistance than the bad path or else we'd have to use massive surveillance and control people's lives to keep them from doing bad.