RE: Witness Flags - Should Witness Downvotes Exist?
I personally believe all the downvoting should be stopped. You say that having just an upvote is a only half a vote but I disagree. Silence is a sufficient powerful negative vote in my mind. Negative voting allows for the tyranny of the masses or whales to extinguish new or controversial ideas - which is censorship. I know the reasons of paedophiles or terrorism are used but this is no different to governments using the same excuse to justify increased mass surveillance. So, for instance if Steemians's like this comment they can upvote it. If they don't like it there is no need for them to downvote it, but simply vote for another comment. Selective use of positive voting is the best way I believe. So, to conclude, I think it's a great idea witness's can't downvote otherwise that gives them the power of a mini media mogul and surely that is precisely what we're trying to avoid here on this platform?
"I personally believe all the downvoting should be stopped."
Note that in this case, this downvoting has nothing to do with previous downvoting. This downvoting doesn't affect rewards either, nor is it really all that visible.
"Negative voting allows for the tyranny of the masses "
How is positive voting not the exact same tyranny of the masses?
"extinguish new or controversial ideas"
We're talking about (political) votes here, not votes that hide posts.
"If they don't like it there is no need for them to downvote it, but simply vote for another comment."
Not according to Steemit. The downvote tool is acceptable to use if you think something has too high of rewards (accordig to them/the "culture" of Steemit)
"Selective use of positive voting is the best way I believe."
This may be true, but I don't think we yet have sufficient reasoning or argument to support this, and I think you are talking about the wrong type of voting still.
" I think it's a great idea witness's can't downvote otherwise that gives them the power of a mini media mogul and surely that is precisely what we're trying to avoid here on this platform?"
This makes me think you didn't actually read the article. You're talking about taking away the normal Steemit rights of witnesses (ie, witch hunt them) so they can't flag/downvote.
I'm talking about allowing a witness down-vote in the same interface for your standard 30 witness votes.
Thanks for the detailed reply. Hands up my comments were not specific to your post. I was talking in a more general way about downvoting in in all cases not just relevant to the witness issue. Also I should just not have use day the term tyranny of the masses as I've not experienced that in steemit all all. I have experienced people with power downvoting completly innocent and honest observations in scientific debate simply because they didn't agree. It was in my mind dangerous censorship as the discussion was on the safety of certain chemicals used in agriculture. I simply believe in the use of positive votes (or lack of them) as the way forward and the whole concept of downvoting is a seemingly minor but potentially major flaw in an amazing platform.
"talking in a more general way about downvoting in in all cases not just relevant to the witness issue."
I definitely agree with your stance on general flagging. Too often used, not very constructive in the majority of cases.
"whole concept of downvoting is a seemingly minor but potentially major flaw"
If we can't flag, however, there is no way to stop abuse. Double-edged sword.