You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Let those shouting cronyism, ponzi, and corruption be the first to cast their stone upon the beggars...
If it had no financial consequences I agree with you. A number saying X amount of people didn't like this. However, where the person that cast the vote FOR the person chose to spend their power they should be free to do. It is not like they are taking the money from anyone when they do it. You can't take money from people in this system as it currently stands other than by negating it with the flag. So that is the only aggressive element I see. (If you look at my wallet... I am NOT wealthy... my votes usually are worth $0.01) So I am not someone wealthy trying to shout down the unfortunate. I just see no one doing harm to me. I have seen people flag GOOD posts because they didn't like the fact they were trending.
Okay @dwinblood I've rethought my position on down-voting. I'm with you after some thinking and I see how down-voting in one sense could be seen a sort of censorship vote, which I'm against. I'm all for politically incorrect or minority views existing and down-voting could impede the free flow of ideas here. That's the conclusion I've come to, so, I'm all for live and let live, it's an open marketplace here free from restriction and that's what's important .
Glad to have you standing beside me. I am almost always a minority when it comes to thought.
I also hate political correctness. I believe it is stagnating, and oppressive.
Bring on the corrosion of conformity.
I am more interested in what individuals have to say, than I am in hearing a bunch of people chanting group think.
EDIT: On the flip side, because I'm not one who agrees most of the time with what is popular I completely expect my growth here to be slow and require a lot of work on my part. I am COMPLETELY fine with that. Speaking to people like you and building a community of individuals is all the payment I seek.
Yes, downvoting shouldn't be anything but a statement of opinion of other voters tastes in content.
I'm going to disagree a little on the "It is not like they are taking the money from anyone when they do it," part. While they aren't taking money from anyone by voting for bad content they are encouraging poor quality content which over time can devalue the value of Steem and Steemit if it continues. The same goes for those flagging good quality content.
Quality of content is also subjective. As someone else pointed out that relevance will be important too. Not only topic relevance but relationship relevance. While I wouldn't vote on a stranger's photo of a drowned cat, I would vote for it if someone I knew posted it. Especially if we're related.
Flagging posts isn't going to stop bad behavior on the voters part so what's the point? Voting is slowly being diluted and redistributed and we should see less posts earning $10k and more people earning overall.
Whether Steemit/Steem succeeds or fails is all going to depend on the community.
I agree. Not much more I can say than that.