Write what I like - Or else!

in #opinion9 years ago


From pixabay.com


Steem is decentralized. Steemit can’t be censored because it’s on the blockchain. Great concept, in theory. But I’ve seen it again and again, the abuse.

The flagging feature is the only tool to get rid of people who spam and plagiarize and those two groups are generally the only ones I flag (especially if it’s another dumbass who thought copy&pasting my posts would be a great idea).

But many, many people flag because they disagree with someone. Is that ok? Let’s ask the ones who implemented the flag feature, as every time you tap the symbol a helpful little guide pops up about what to flag:

• Disagreement on rewards
• Fraud or Plagiarism
• Hate Speech or Internet Trolling
• Intentional miss-categorized content or Spam

The only disagreement I see here is „disagreement on rewards“ which is, in my eyes, a bit tricky. Still, I’ve seen it more than once that someone flagged a comment without any reward just because they didn’t like what the commenter said. And I’m not talking about the dumb „nice post, upvot me pls“ comments. Those are spam and can be flagged to death.

Hate speech and internet trolling is tricky too, because something isn’t automatically one of the two just because you disagree. It requires a certain level of finesse I suppose.

But what I see over and over again is people with a high reputation and/or SP threatening to totally destroy somebody else, just because they don’t agree with their views.

Don’t get me wrong, I’d love to flag those I disagree with and there are a lot of them, especially on steemit. But I’m not the one who can decide what’s right or wrong, even if I think I know better than them. It’s just not my place.

But many think it’s their place. And as a result, they totally destroy accounts of users who didn’t do anything wrong (this does not include users who started a flag war. If you flag something that isn’t spam/plagiarism and get flagged back as a result… tough luck but you brought this upon yourself).

What I’m trying to say is that there are many extremely aggressive groups of people on steemit who search certain tags for people whose posts they disagree with just to flag those users down to zero, both in rep and payout.

This creates an atmosphere of fear, people become afraid of posting what they think. And when that happens, steemit will sooner or later stop getting new users, because nobody wants to be active on a platform where they can be destroyed for stating their view (agreeing or opposing) on a wide range of conspiracy theories.

I haven’t found a single of these theories I agree with. In fact, I’d be happier if they wouldn’t constantly be discussed on steemit. But especially the ones who believe those theories are true are incredibly aggressive. And while I generally try to follow the words of Evelyn Beatrice Hall

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"

The fact that people abuse their power to silence those who disagree makes me want to abandon this rule and flag them. I won’t. I said earlier I only flag spam and plagiarism/stolen content. But it makes me furious.

Because if you want free speech, you better grant it to everyone else too.

If not, you’re just another asshole and not better than those you claim to fight.

Sort:  

I completely agree with you on this. Members should not abuse their power to flag people down simply because they don't agree with what they say. If I come across a view I don't like or agree with, I just click next to another post. We are not here to agree or disagree with each, but to grow as a community that is free to express itself as long as we are not preaching hate, prejudice or abuse. I sometimes get the 'Follow me, I follow you' spams, but ignore t them because they're already on their way down to 0 rep with or without my flagging. People should really use this feature responsibility and for valid reasons.

Great post! I think that SMTs are potentially the solution to this. SteemIt.com is just the initial proof of concept site built around the Steem platform, but the idea has always been for other more niche communities to be built on top of it, separate from SteemIt.

SMTs will not only allow this, but also allow more control over the distribution of the Tokens, and therefore control over moderation, to the community creators.

The problem will never go away, but hopefully in the future we will be able to pick and choose which Steem-based communities we want to be a part of based on whatever criteria you want, one of which can be how open the community is to different points of view.

This is one of the biggest things I look forward to with SMTs, and I hope to create one or more such communities myself if no one else does it first!

I hope you're right and it will make it better

We are suppose to keep an open mind in this community , We can freely debate as to who is right or wrong . But the hypocrisy is visible when we take praises but flag criticism .Thats really mature, if you think about it the whole crypto currency thing came about when we started questioning the norm! i don't understand how a member steemit doesn't grasp this.

I wasn't fully aware about these "flag wars" but you put it very well; everyone should have a freedom to express their opinions as long as it isn't hate speech, trolling ect. no matter how ridiculous they might seem.

Flagging should be left for what it's for: to eliminate spam and plagiarism, not to be used as childishly expressing hate or disagreement on people for their opinions by ruining their rewards.

It's not even the rewards in many cases, some get flagged to a rep of 0 or even negative values. It's possible to recover from a $0.00 payout, but try coming back from a -1 reputation without the help of friends!

Ah, I didn't even realize the reputation being hurt! That makes it even worse for them who get targeted by unreasonable hate.

There's a similar issue on Reddit - downvotes were designed to be used for people who didn't contribute to the discussion or were being toxic. Instead it's used as a button for people who disagree. I think some people legitimately have a hard time understanding the difference between a respectful disagreement and something that's toxic or not a useful contribution.

This is indeed one of the biggest challenges here.
Quote "This creates an atmosphere of fear, people become afraid of posting what they think."
Well, when there is no change in the flag-system we need to find a different solution. This could be realized not by fighting the bad but by empowering the good. It must be done in a transparent and honest way to keep this platform healthy, bcs otherwise steemit would end up like a brain-dead patient kept alive by machines...

I agree 100%! But who determines who's "good" and deserves that power? And how long until those "good" people start being influenced by their own opinions and remove/flag content they just don't agree with?

We'd have the same problem we have right now, just with less possibilities to fight against it.

I think it's way too easy for those with a lot (and I mean a lot) of SP to dictate what everyone else does. Maybe there needs to be a limit to how much SP influences a flag. Like beyond a certain amount the flagging power stops rising.

You are absolutely right - the big fish eats the smaller. This is a fact in the real life as well as in steemit. So, flagging should be only used for plagiarism, violence or something else that undermine the (unwritten) rules of a modern society. but there must be a possibility to stop the abuse of flagging. This is not the case at the moment! There must be clear rules when a flag is used too extensively. Somebody who flags down a person of a high rep lvl to "dust" must let an internal alarm system BURN! It should be impossible to destroy the reputation of a member within seconds.
Pls correct me if I am wrong, but for flagging could be an extra timeout installed maybe?

Maybe there should be a limit to how much a certain person can damage another one's reputation. By doing that, flagging someone down would really be a community effort.

Then again, there are communities of spammers (!) with significant reputations who could counter a flagging of one of their own...

It's really tricky.

When I received my first flag, it was like - what the hell, what have I done but then I came to a realization - there are forces of evil without any fun.

Ps. Thanks for your perspective! You described it very well. Especially the quote, it fits right in.

How about a downvote bot that only downvotes excessive downvoters?

Of course, I'm kidding, but I have always disagreed with people flagging content simply to adjust the reward. I think that is pretty petty behavior, and I agree that Steemit is worse off for it.

You are right, but what could be a solution for this problem? Flags feature have to exist here (spam, plagiarism etc.), but it can lead to a similar situation as you are talking about. I, personally, have no clue how to fix this issue.

I don't have a solution either, as the best solution would be if people stopped being huge dicks to each other. But will that happen? Unlikely.

Maybe a feature where one could just "report" spam which is then checked by someone official? It would take the power away from abusers but would also make everything less decentralized...

And of course you'd need someone (better a whole team, like steemcleaners) to do that. Who pays for this?

I think as long as steemit is a decentralized and (practically) free service, there is no real better solution. Not without making a lot of people very angry.

And it's the angry people that are fucking everything up right now for everyone else.

I imagine it could potentially be a democratic system like the witnesses here. People can be voted into position as cleaners and they get income based on their actions keeping track of the reports. It would certainly be a big job though, but require less 'expertise' like a witness so more would be available to take part.

I don't expect such a thing to happen based on steemit's track record, but one can dream

It actually sounds like a viable option!

An easy solution could be to make flagging a post cost 10% of your total VP, this will make flagging less likely to happen unless it is really needed. Also VP given back in a reverse fashion if many flag the same item. So 1st flagger loses 10% and when the second person flags the 1st flagger gets back .25% VP.

I don't think to many are going to want to give up 10% of their VP for something that they just don't like. Also another feature could be a drop down that makes you choose why you flagged the post. So you have to state why you flagged it. If someone clicks plagiarism as their reason and it was not plagiarized then the flag gets removed. There are many ways to solve the problem it just takes a majority want to implement the change.

That's a good idea. I think the technical solution combined with consequences and give reason for flagging would take out much of the emotions.

When you say "it takes a majority" - what will happen when this majority would vote for your solution? And who is in charge?

In our German steemit community I just recently supported a member who has programmed a really good application as a service for the users Steemworld.

If this is just a technical problem, it would be easy. But it isn't as I guess? I am not long enough a member to judge that.

I am attempting my own solution to this called @freezepeach. It is a service where people can submit opinion flags to be upvoted and resteemed. The goal isn't to reward posts that have been flagged for difference of opinion, but to neutralize the rewards taken away by the flag.

The account may look inactive on the surface since it was announced weeks ago, but there are big things happening in the background, such as custom voting tool development (to match flags exactly), delegation app to make it easy for the community to help out, and official support from the largest steemit community on discord.

That closing sentence. Pure gold.

I couldn't agree more. The question is whether they do care being just another a-hole or not. I doubt they do, sadly enough.

At a certain amount of power, people stop caring about others I guess. Not always, but in too many cases.