100% agree that flagging should never be for ideology but about the quality of content. We don't need to agree with the substance of the content to acknowledge it's quality and that it adds value. However, we may be more inclined to support content that coincides with our worldview at a higher level which I think is natural.

I've been thinking deeply about this problem and actually brought up one thing I thought could be a solution to our partner @r0ndon over at @freezepeach (the flag neutralizer) but the idea needs work.

The idea was something I like to call reactive flag protection mechanism and would be a simple check of incoming down votes on a user that is attempting to flag another. If it is found that the flag appears to be reactive or retaliatory, it would then be nerfed or wholly negated. The problem is that it can be used to cover abuse as all the accounts would need to do is flag @steemcleaners and SFR users in advance for instance. It would not address the issue of flag abuse by alts though but at least reduce the damage potential of vindictive flagging.

The idea didn't sit too well with @r0ndon not just for that reason but also ideologically as he thinks it may be a tad too authoritarian. I don't really see it that way and am still considering the implications but am not sure the idea would gain traction unless I had a damn good presentation.

So, let's think about the scenario I posed. Perhaps, there should be either an rshares or weight threshold that would result in a significant cost of attempting to exploit the RFPM.

Let's say the abuse account would need to employ 100% weight flags against all known abuse fighter accounts in order to be covered by the RFPM. The problem is with very low stake accounts as the cost would be negligible so that may be one reason to consider an rshares threshold.

Being that RFPM would probably be a hard sell. I think pursuing an automated off chain solution may be worthwhile but that would require stake. Perhaps an account that would target the same flags as RFPM and neutralize or dampen them. The goal is to increase the cost of revenge flagging rendering it a non-optimal use of one's SP.

Thanks for bringing up the issue and sorry you are caught up in that war. Thinking about writing a post about it. It has resulted in a loss of about 3.5k of SP to SFR from both sides.

P.S. Any idea why @fulltimegeek doesn't just agree to decline rewards on the @proboards stuff? Hoping they arrive at some sort of cease fire soon.

Posted using Partiko Android