ummm... if there was the ability for any user to "block" any user that they choose, and by so doing prevent that user from flagging them... abuse would be FAR MORE rampant than it is now! Surely you can see that? There would be literally nothing possible to do against an abuser. This is particularly the case in terms of the second sort of abusers you mention, the plagiarists and spammers. Please actually stop for a minute and imagine what this blockchain would look like if plagiarists and spammers could simply chose to prevent accounts from flagging them. I do not think you have thought through the implications of what you are suggesting. In any system where monetary reward/personal gain is possible, we know that a significant portion of individuals will game the system to their advantage even if it means taking actions detrimental to other participants in the system (this has been well proven through game theory studies, replicated hundreds of times to the point where we can come as close to saying that it is "fact" as we can say that the sun will come up tomorrow). There is monetary reward on steem blockchain. The second abusers could simply choose to prevent any user from flagging them, would be the second the entire blockchain would collapse underneath a huge steaming pile of plagiarism and spam. EDIT - I know that you personally are imagining using this ability in a constructive fashion to prevent abuses from being directed at a person. But you have to think like an abuser to see the true implications of what you propose. If everyone was altruistic a system like this could work, but of course if everyone was altruistic you wouldn't need something like you propose in the first place!
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Actually, I have thought a LOT about these kinds of issues. In fact, I've been working on these issues for 15 years. There is nothing stopping an individual like myself to subscribe to a spam service on the blockchain that would warn me of all the spammers on the blockchain and automatically block them from interacting with me. I would still challenge the spam services regarding their lists, but it is a way to do this without violence or flagging. At least at that point everything is voluntary, rather than using force or coercion. Same could be done for those who engage in plagiarism or other forms of violence. I am not for a moment under the illusion that everyone behaves honorably. I'm very aware of just how prevalent violence is in our world. What I propose is a non-violent approach to dealing with violent people. I know it is hard for people to see. I pray one day they can. In the mean time, I will continue to speak of these issues and teach people how to implement what I speak of in their day to day lives. This not only applies here but it applies in ALL areas of my life. We can find peaceful ways of dealing with violence. I walk this path every day for years. It is not pretty, but it works.
No, I mean the blockchain would literally collapse. Not in a figurative sense. The blockchain could not function if your proposal was implemented. The flagging of spam accounts by spaminators, mackbot, etc. serves a vital purpose. If spammers could simply choose to not be flagged, the entire thing would literally collapse. The levels of spam posting would increase past the point that the witness servers could bear the state cost and even the top witnesses would be operating at a deficit. The only other alternative if spammers could choose to not be flagged, would be that the RC costs of making actions to the blockchain would have to be raised up so high that no users could transact at all except the absolute biggest whales.
EDIT - let me put this another way. I don't want to dismiss your 15 years of experience of thinking about these issues in the "real world", but in a very real sense, that experience isn't particularly relevant here on the Steem blockchain. You are absolutely correct that in a non-blockchain setting, if you could simply subscribe to a spam list and not see the spam posts, there would be no harm to you. But on the blockchain, whether or not you can see the spam, there is in fact a cost to you and every user for spam posting. The current RC costs per action are based on the current levels of activity on the blockchain, so you (and every user) are paying a price for the current levels of spam posting. We can say with absolute certainty that if spammers could choose to not be flagged, levels of spam posting would explode. This means, again with absolute certainty, that the cost to you and every other user for that spam posting would increase. Do you understand if I put it that way? The victims of your proposal would be those with the least steem power, as the cost to transact on the blockchain would price them out of using Steem at all. And if the levels of spam increase to the point that I am certain they would if spammers could choose not to be flagged, I think only very large accounts could actually transact. This would prevent spam, but it would also prevent... all other legitimate uses.
EDIT part two: I actually think the only real solution for a blockchain based social media site is to eliminate monetary reward. As long as there is monetary reward, there will be abusers manipulating system for reward, and flags will be a vital necessity to keep the system working. I would love to participate in a Steem clone that had no tokens, no payouts, but was just a truly decentralized social media network with the censorship resistant benefits of blockchain. I know myself and many others would use it even for no rewards. Heck, literally billions of people use Facebook for no reward.