You seem think that downvoting someone is harassment,
Specifically for differences of opinion.
yet nothing stops the individual being harassed from expressing themselves while being downvoted,
If your rep is -9 then it is extremely difficult (nearly impossible) to participate in any form of discussion with the broader steem community. I've even tried to direct-link to their comments and the link does not work.
It's de facto censorship.
AND, I'M EVEN AFRAID TO MENTION THEIR NAMES BECAUSE I FEAR BEING TARGETED/HARRASED/DOWNVOTED BY UNREASONABLE PEOPLE, SO THERE IS CLEARLY A "CHILLING-EFFECT" WHICH IS, I WOULD ARGUE, PART OF THE INTENT OF THE DOWNVOTERS.
You also seem to think that someone booing someone else is no different from censorship even though someone booing does not stop someone from speaking WHILE the other individual is booing them,
If nobody can hear you over the incessant air-horns, then you are de facto censored.
Do you think that people who disagree should (EITHER) express their disagreement with reasonable words (OR) simply avoid each other (use the "mute" function)?
Ad hominem attacks and air-horning your opponent are the tactics of FASCISM (dismantles open dialogue).
ZOMBIEBASICTRAINING
Copyright notice: Feel free to copy and paste any LOGICZOMBIE original content (posts and or comments and or replies and logiczombie logo, excluding quoted 3rd party content of course) according to copyleft principles. copyleft wiki
Use the tag #LOGICZOMBIE if you'd like to participate in a civil debate or have your post critiqued for logical coherence.
Essential sites for (new) steemit users:
check anybody's steemit activity log
check anybody's steemit activity patterns (delegations)
offical steemit etiquette guide
check anybody's re-steems
check anybody's achievments
check anybody's ranking
identify the most influential steemit users
identify the current top 20 witnesses
advice for minnows and plankton
steemit explained (TBHTS)
are you tired of $0.00 rewards? (balance denominated in SBD)
are you tired of $0.00 rewards? also check
important facts about rep
Also, set your rewards to 100% steem power and you'll get a cool steem logo next to all your posts!!
Also, if you're getting harassed by downvoters, please appeal to @freezepeach (setting your rewards to "declined" doesn't seem to protect you from loss of rep, although it does dissuade steemcleaners and steemflagrewards). Downvoters with lower rep than you won't bring your rep down.
Please consider delegating a few steem to @freezepeach fund to show at least token support for their valiant efforts (just leave a comment if you don't know how to delegate).
Perhaps anarchy already exists and government is merely the highest manifestation of organized crime. – @thoughts-in-time
ZOMBIEBASICTRAINING
+proHUMAN +proFAMILY
Your scathing critique is requested.
They are simply destructive elements that have too much time. I wanted a ban function or another self-protection function a year ago. Everyone should have a virtual house right, including on the blockchain. A fat whale that doesn't match your opinion can destroy your account. This is, in my opinion, a design error.
I agree. If we're going to implement a "libertarian" model, there should be some mechanism to protect the individual (blog) from (activist) vigilante hoards. I can't believe people are getting heavily downvoted simply because they've commented that "veganism doesn't seem to be a really good fit for me personally".
I always thought the "militant vegan" was an overblown myth. But now, I'm not so sure.
Here too we see a mirror of society :-/.
I was thinking something like a "friends only" setting would be a good idea, which would essentially mute (hide) your blog and comments from everyone who was not followed by you. Mute/blocking individual users would probably just proliferate alts.
Protesting without dialogue (with the sole intent to silence opposition) is harassment, not free speech.
Another interesting thought. Tricky. Weird. Makes me thing whether "democratic" protest is a form of harassment. And it probably is! As I always say: Free speech includes being free to be an ahole, no matter what. How have we learned to be nice to each other without being aholes from time to time? or watch other people being like that? There is no thing like perfection. There is only genius. !BEER
If they have (apparently) no cogent ideas and aren't willing to even speak to anyone from the "opposition" then, YES.
Hm. Still weird. They do go protest when the opposition does not listen, don't they?
And all they are saying is: Don't do force your ideas onto anyone including ME any longer, but force my ideas onto anyone including YOU! Looks like a vicious circle to me. One of the drawbacks of free speech.
Me thinking of this R.E.M. song that goes like "It's the end of the world as WE KNOW IT ... and I feel fine." May it be the more they harass each other, the earlier we can get back to reasonable dialog. No ifs and whens, please, when it comes to politics. Stay logical. !invest_vote
Sometimes they do and sometimes they don't.
Protesting should force a conversation, not simply make conversation impossible.
Your opponents are not demons, they're humans.
Well, should is a tricky word. No verb, no adjective. Often times - if not every single freaking time - it is a precursor for things being opposite to what is expected. Speaking of opposition here! Then strangely the "results" leading people to do even more of the same things without wondering why more of what's not working still is not working (me humming R.E.M. again) but brings more of what let people to believe others should do something because of what they expected of doing that in the first place. Weird.
I'd rather say programs. Or zombies. And they are not my opponents. They are each other's opponents. I'm not concerned about zombies. I'm concerned about people who turn into zombies in the moment me or my family/friends are involved and no one had expected them to turn into it (yet).
!invest_vote !COFFEEA !DRAMATOKEN !dramatoken (Again I don't remember whether it looks for upper or lower case, so let's take both.)
Good point.
@andrepol denkt du hast ein Vote durch @investinthefutur verdient! ----> Wer ist investinthefutur ?
@andrepol thinks you have earned a vote of @investinthefutur !----> Who is investinthefutur ?
@andrepol denkt du hast ein Vote durch @investinthefutur verdient! ----> Wer ist investinthefutur ?
@andrepol thinks you have earned a vote of @investinthefutur !----> Who is investinthefutur ?
View or trade
BEER.Hey @logiczombie, here is a little bit of
BEERfrom @andrepol for you. Enjoy it!Learn how to earn FREE BEER each day by staking.
FROM THE OFFICIAL (UNOFFICIAL) STEEMIT ETIQUITE GUIDE
A couple of jackasses cannot grasp this and have ruined any chance of onboarding new members.
I don't disagree.
It's interesting watching you and Baah debate this, as when you first came on my radar I had suspected you both are the same person. Still not completely ruled out, as a master debater (which both of you clearly are) is capable of arguing positions they do not hold personally. Having said that, I see both sides of this issue. Several I have enjoyed here have been targets, I myself have been downvoted for not only interacting with some who are but resteeming them. I never allowed that to stop my support of the person being targeted.
I agree that at times this targeting is a dick move, made because at the end of the day might makes right. In life, and here in an environment that the law is stake based. One of the ones most often complained about here for doing this (Bernie) has said more than once, if you don't like it buy Steem and power it up to protect yourself. Obviously for many here that isn't feasible, yet that isn't the systems fault but those of us who don't have the means. We come into this system (Stake based) knowing that those with more stake have more power and by the same token at any time can choose to walk away and not honor such a system.
I am curious on your thoughts on a thought that keeps gnawing at me. I have watched platforms censoring/de-platforming for some time now. I see many who I agree with being targeted by this, many of these people having many followers and perhaps a good amount of wealth to various degrees. So my question is this.
If platforms (including Steemit) in unpalatable due to (dick moves by those in power or outright censorship) why aren't moves being made by those affected to create their own platforms where they can decide the rules. Baah points out a lot that Steemit is not Steem. The claim (as I understand it) is the chain is censorship proof (I know, most of us do not have the knowledge to access the chain without the front ends such as Steemit). The front ends are privately owned, and can allow how they wish. With the upcoming SMT, it seems like one of means (or a group with means such as the Freezepeach group could utilize the benefits of this chain using their own tokens, their own rules to allow the types of speech that is felt is being censored/hidden here. Why isn't this solution reached for by the many who agree with the premise many are being censored here?
I've written on this in the past. Here is one of my last posts on it several months ago, if you're interested.
https://steemit.com/steem/@practicalthought/trying-to-force-the-square-peg-in-the-round-hole
I have neither the time or the money or the expertise to "start my own blockchain".
I believe an elegant solution would be perhaps for someone to clone steemit and reverse the rankings (this would be the ONLY modification). It could be steem.freespeech or upside-down.steem or some other generally self-explanatory title (@ura-soul and @themarkymark, could you please give me a quick opinion on how feasible you think this idea (a reverse rep view of steemit) would be to implement?).
That way, the most downvoted posts would show at the top of the trending page.
And everything with a payout or pending payout above 20 steem would be automatically hidden (with a reveal button for the curious).
It might look a mess, but I'd definitely check it out.
To delegate, right-click and open this link in a "new incognito window" (so forms and cookies don't get cached) https://steemworld.org/@practicalthought - then click "delegation" on the left, then delegate or undelegate or modify existing delegations as you see fit at any time. It doesn't require your master password, just your "active key", so any "risk" is extremely low. I believe delegating is much better than upvoting because you don't have to do it every day (it's like a semi-permanent upvote to the account instead of to a single post) and you never lose the steem-power, you can take it back whenever you want.
So it's kinda like a "super-pat.reon" because you don't have to give anybody your credit card info and you can take the money back if you find a better priority and nobody can stop you (pat.reon could potentially ban certain users in the future).
It could be steem.freespeech or upside-down.steem or some other generally self-explanatory title (@steemchiller, could you please give me a quick opinion on how feasible you think this idea (a reverse rep view of steemit) would be to implement?).
I don't think that it would be worth the effort. Many (I guess most) shit accounts have a low rep, so one would need to filter manually and go through all the mess just to find a few interesting posts.
Since the majority of people actually don't want to see most of the downvoted stuff, there is not much money to be made with such a system. It's not a super bad idea, but I think it should be solved within the regular platform by providing more filtering features.
Sustainable platforms can be found where the mainstream hangs around. With currently only ~ 1.4 million users on chain it's probably just a waste of time. Many good projects died, not because they were bad, but because the targeted audience was just too small at that point in time.
Would it be relatively easy to just make a page that showed the top downvoted posts? And maybe the top downvoted users? I'd like a page that perhaps showed downvoted posts that my voting power could be used to counter-vote. Maybe something like this is already available and I just don't know about it?
The regular APIs are designed to return the data ordered descending. For a performant solution one would need to implement own API calls on blockchain/hivemind level and provide own nodes which run the new logic or build an own database that is optimized for the new queries.
It's not just about forking condenser and changing a few variables. Most changes would have to be made on the backend.
Ah, so, maybe not as easy as, https://usesteem.com/steemwhales/ (which appears to be down at the moment).
Here we go, https://steemitboard.com/ranking/?p=54401&s=reputation
As many also don't. However, I notice that some of those being touted with large followings elsewhere never seem to consider such an idea. I laugh when I see some pushing to bring them here as they would find themselves subject to the same treatment you are posting about here.
As mentioned before, I don't delegate as it would require me to give an active key to a third party. I sent the 1 Steem as I said, which will benefit them more if they power up as they will always have it without fear of being undelegated.
The reason I mention someone(s) who feel the stake system is unfair start their own token system either using SMT or the Steem engine is exactly what Markymark explained. It is hard coded into the chain itself. The only way one could utilize the blockchain and neutralize current large stakeholders would be creating their own tokens. They would benefit from all the pluses of the chain itself (speed and cost) while not being held to the same punitive (nor rewarding) possibilities. This would probably be more feasible in the long run than bringing many who are actually being deplatformed here, as I pointed out they would also probably incur some of the downvotes from those being mentioned for disagreement over their messages.
Thank you for your support.
Rep is part of the blockchain, not the front end. You could make a front-end (even clone Steemit condenser) that just doesn't display rep or uses some other method to calculate rep (although you would need a place to store this data).
Thank you for your reply.
So, ball-park, programming + url registration/hosting + data storage... a few thousand dollars?
Depends if you are building a new rep system, or just removing it from the UI. Removing rep would be easiest, building a new one much more complex.
Perfecto. About how much do you think it would be to just remove rep? And do you think people would want to DDOS the site if it started gaining popularity (can that be mitigated)?
Hard to say, it varies greatly not on the work but the person doing it.
Removing REP from the UI is one thing, but you also have to deal with the hiding comment behavior as well.
You can use CloudFlare to mitigate most low level DDOS attacks, but high level ones would require a lot of cash (DDOS protection is very expensive).
I think you would need to do a lot more than hide rep to get a front end that would be popular.
@logiczombie you earned a follower ^^. Fully agree with what you expressed :)
Thanks for the encouragement!
It is like a paradox. But you can note differences between steemit.com and busy.org.
What would you consider to be the key differences?
Last time I checked, downvoted things appear on Busy.org without the need to press a button to reveal it like you do on Steemit it seems. So, a very small difference but I like it.
Nice, I was not aware of that. Thanks for the info.
It's the same on steempeak.com, but IMO the interface is even better than busy.org's.
Thanks for the info, nobody's mentioned that to me before now.
Yes, true. I recognized that comment threads are bisplayed differently on busy when I was looking for a long, long thread with @logiczombie. Via steemit it does not show a comment properly when it's to far down the line. Busy shows it properly. Though I have trouble staying logged in via busy when opening a comment URL, so it was no help on answering to the thread.
!invest_vote
You can still see things on Steemit but you may have to click on a link to see the rest of them in some cases.
Yes, I know, thank you. The thing is: the URL that lead to a specific comment does not work and when I click for the trailing thread the specific comment is not addressed.
With busy.org on the other hand the specific comment is addressed - but until now I could not answer to it because when I log in I end up at some home page and not back at the specific comment. !invest_vote
Click on this link and tell me you see our thread here:
https://steemit.com/ethics/@andrepol/q5d1or
Things appear to work for me on Steemit, generally. But sometimes, the page may not fully load for me on Steemit. I wonder if the issues you run into is something like that or not.
@andrepol denkt du hast ein Vote durch @investinthefutur verdient! ----> Wer ist investinthefutur ?
@andrepol thinks you have earned a vote of @investinthefutur !----> Who is investinthefutur ?
Funny that I read about the topic here as I just today commented someone who said that he doesn't downvote without giving a reason and that this should be common courtesy.
.....
To answer your question, I place it here so I can better respond to it:
I speak from my experience only. About myself and those with whom disagreement arose. I noticed when my inner disagreement with how a topic was published and represented by that human was already taking up the biggest space, no debate and direct argument seemed to reach my disputant. I was particularly shocked by him because in all the weeks before we had some quite good conversations and I could not understand this part of his notion. We argued and I eventually pressed the "mute" button. Not to prevent me from being approached by him but prevent myself to come up with further arguments as well as despair.
More than a year later I see it more relaxed. Even though I might think not having transferred a message which meant a lot to me, I have hope that it was delivered, because of our good contact beforehand. That's all what one can do in case of disagreement. I eventually un-muted him and left a comment here and there. For the time being, I found it was needed. One needs protection from oneself once in a while.
I have a no flag policy. Only up- never downvote anyone. The one and only group I know which also has this policy is @steemstem and I find, they drive well with it. I haven't checked recently but I guess it's still the same.
What would interest me right now is to see a statistic which shows the tendency of using downvotes from the last 8 months or so. People argue a lot on the surface. It often contradicts what the actually do.
Censoring is not supported by me.
It's also like walking by a street performer or a bar-tender and thinking, "I don't like this performance/presentation, so I'll just kick over their tip jar, so their tips will be redistributed to the 'best' (top earners) street performers and bar-tenders (who already have the lion's share of tips)."
I greatly appreciate your comments.
Yes, you know, I think the paradoxical situation is basically quite fine, because it is able to represent something very interesting: That there is no praise and no punishment at all, but actually always only one lesson to take and give. In the most positive sense of all. It describes a spontaneous being alive in situations of contemporary nature. When I receive such a lesson, which I do not consider either as punishing or praising, I can take it as a question addressed to me: Is what the other person is saying to me in any way consistent? Then I say: Thank you for the lesson, there is a part of it that inspires me to change my action/thoughts. If the lesson is not coherent, I say: Thank you for the lesson and your intention to give me one. Only I did not need it right now. Thanks anyway.
Now the analogy I am using is just an analogy. The punching in the stomach didn't really happen. Neither did the knocking over of the tip jar from your example.
I think what those who have a similarly humorous view of downvotes want to express is that they acknowledge that a virtual currency is simply virtual and the actions here need not have any physical consequences. It is easily said that the 7-day window represents a quantity in the making. As long as it lasts, every up- or downvote is nothing more than an ongoing process. You are neither punished nor rewarded in this becoming.
In principle I have nothing against this view. It does, however, presuppose that those in the process of becoming the result of the votes will see it that way, and that they will see it as a game that is not to be taken too seriously.
In so far as I cannot assume that the recipient of my downvotes does not have the same view, I would have to ask him beforehand, in order to ensure that he can become a friend with this idea, whether he agrees with me that I merely want to give him a friendly lesson in the form of a downvote. If he says: "Yes", then I end up back at the initial question, what is the point of downvotes, right? Because as far as the content is concerned, I have not yet said anything about the lesson in question. So we would have a friendly exchange about it, he would accept my lesson with thanks.
If everyone was always ready for a lesson and an up- or down-vote would result in a self reflexive questioning of the author of a publication, someone who receives a down/up-vote would ask himself: "Oh, so I received a down-vote ... what is that supposed to tell me? In deed, I think that everyone already knows when writing an article that there are some things they shouldn't say or write like that, but they do it against their better judgment. Same goes for the things expressed which one considers probably coherent (we know always as a Hintergedanke --> look at quote No. 9 from bottom of the site up.
This completely self-referential approach is a tough challenge for people, but of course we can do exactly that. Why? Because it is fun. After all - and this is world famous - you wouldn't accept a ready-made answer from another person anyway, if you wouldn't give it to yourself as well.
Since I don't assume that people see this as a paradoxical environment, but one that should be taken seriously, I cannot give any downvotes, because there is no convention in the classical sense of the word. I need people who accept lessons in the way I need them.
The hintergedanke quote from Alan Watts reminds me of a quote from Robert Anton Wilson, "Everbody's an a--hole and if you think you're not an a--hole, that just proves you're the worst kind of a--hole".
LOL :D
... Wilson ... Wilson ... is this not a science fiction author?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Anton_Wilson
Robert Anton Wilson
Robert Anton Wilson (born Robert Edward Wilson; January 18, 1932 – January 11, 2007) was an American author, novelist, essayist, editor, playwright, poet, futurist, and self-described agnostic mystic. Recognized by Discordianism as an Episkopos, Pope, and saint, Wilson helped publicize the group through his writings and interviews.
Wilson described his work as an "attempt to break down conditioned associations, to look at the world in a new way, with many models recognized as models or maps, and no one model elevated to the truth". His goal being "to try to get people into a state of generalized agnosticism, not agnosticism about God alone but agnosticism about everything."Wilson was a major figure in the counterculture, comparable to one of his coauthors, Timothy Leary, as well as Terence McKenna and others.
I mean, I'm not one to simply "appeal to the rules" (INTP), but it states very clearly in the official (unofficial) steemit conduct guide (I'm paraphrasing here), "do not downvote for disagreements (differences of opinion) downvotes are for gross misconduct (criminal behavior) and please leave a note explaining why you downvoted".
This seems like it would solve at least 99% of the complaints.
I would rather think that this guide raises more questions than it answers. I detect a certain pattern of mutual aggression-pleasure in the downvote wars. A lust, in a sense. Buttered by a kind of confusion and not letting go from a once-fixed standpoint. In principle, a thief recognizes the other, but finds thievery unfair if someone is better at it. One could also try humour. Only, one must really feel it.
What is being fought about at all? Sometimes I ask myself whether the content is still important to anyone. Is it even a good idea to monetize digital expression if it's seen as too important a source of income ...? It's nice to see something quantitatively rewarded, but making it the most important thing?
This can be seen as an experiment in which there is no control centre to intervene and the users are left to their own devices. And perhaps for the first time we can understand how difficult it actually is to find consensus. I once tried to take up the topic of consensus and offer a formal method where it would have been easy to capture it in statistics. Here, my contributions to it (the second one explains the method):
https://steemit.com/systems/@erh.germany/play-with-me-an-invitation-of-changing-the-habit-of-like-and-don-t-like
https://steemit.com/steemstem/@erh.germany/groupthink-a-systemic-view-on-group-decisions-and-consensus
This is what you and me are used to:
😒 1 % = almost no like , 😊 100 % = I like it a lot
This is what you and me could become used to:
✌ 0 % = least resistance, 😩 100 % = greatest resistance
;-)
It's a real-world test of libertarian ideals.
I've always said that libertarian ideals lead to MOBSTER ETHICS.
And while I'd absolutely love to be proven wrong, I'm not sure much hope is warranted.
The only intrinsic advantage steem has is the TRANSPARENT blockchain.
At least people can see what's going on "behind the scenes", and that makes it harder to fool the newbz.
Dear @logiczombie
I fully agree with you. Indeed it's de facto censorship. My latest post has been heavily downvoted because I talked about flagging abuse :/
ps.
Together with few friends from @project.hope - we're working on our own curation trail.
Basically all publications which we resteem on project.hope (3-4 posts daily) are being upvoted with @ph-fund, which triggers our curation trail. And few hours later 300k upvote from project.hope is being placed on that post. Which pretty much double all curation rewards of those who follow this trail. I see it as a win-win scanrio.
Is it okey if I share with you link to post where we're brainstorming this idea? I would like to hear your feedback and perhaps you will find it interesting and worth joining.
Yours, Piotr
Please share any links you wish. I have been very impressed with your engagement. I scanned over your "tribes" post and your "project.hope" seems like a noble effort, it just doesn't rise to the top of my "focus list" at the moment. And as far as "tribes", I really don't think creating a zillion weird tokens is going to do anything except confuse people. Steem is an amazing blockchain. We just need to make it friendlier to the new-steemians who are checking it out because they're getting banned from re.ddit and fac.ebook and yo.utube and pa.ypal.
My current "focus list" is supporting @freezepeach (they are the only account I'm aware of that is 100% in support of fair and free speech),
Secondly, @ura-soul (they are intelligent and fair-minded and their curiosity appears to overlap quite nicely with my own, and they currently can't post regularly because they shockingly aren't getting enough support for their efforts),
And thirdly, I feel it is also extremely important to show tangible support for the SMALL FISH who are not afraid to express nuanced opinions (not just shill for corporate entertainment and news and products and services, like popular yo.utubers) and who are willing to engage in reasonable discussions (civil debate) with people they disagree with.
I do applaud your efforts, but you seem to have managed to inspire enough support that my paltry steem-power would do very little (in percentage terms) to further your projects.
I do appreciate your attention and consideration.
I don't see how downvoting is censorship, because if it is still there it is not censored. You can tell people how to open a link if the rep is low, can you? Then do!
And then, even though I'm not into this downvoting a lot, I wonder why when I upvote something because I like it, why not downvote what I dislike? Oh, I see, downvote is not flagging. True!
btw: I suggest politics and religion to be #nsfw the same way p@rn is. Well, no I don't. No kid get's confused when it sees puppets. With boobs and things this is different.
I wonder why when I like something at a store I can buy it, why not vandalize what I dislike?
I wonder why when I like the performance of a street-musician I can throw a coin in their hat, why not take coins out of the hats I dislike?
Hahahaha! That's a nice argument (on vandal). Not a valid one when you ask me. The musician goes in a similar direction. Great arguments! Let's go in this direction. !invest_vote
From my perspective the point is that the rewards are distributed from inflation. It's neither vandalism nor theft nor loot when someone's reward is diminished. It's more like stating: I don't like this store, I don't like this musician, and it's not only that I dislike them, but I'm not going to fight for their right to commerce. (You remember this Beatrice Hall statement that is said to be by Voltaire?)
In other words: I don't want to see more of the content that I downvote. (And as I've said, I downvoted only once or twice so far and only for reasons of abuse not whim. But I like to reflect on the means of downvoting.)
Let's stay logical. No window smashed! (Thinking of Bastiat)
That would be true if the minumum payout was 0.001 steem.
As it stands now, all the below-minimum payouts (small-fish upvotes) get REDISTRIBUTED to the big-fish (paid to posts that accrue $20 steem or more).
The higher the pending payout is, the bigger percentage of the below-minimum pool they get.
For example, a post with a pending payout of $117.55 steem will get a bigger scoop (%) of the pool than a post with $17.55 steem. It's not "evenly distributed".
https://steemit.com/trending/
It's literally stealing from the poor to feed the rich.
True. Again true. Well, that's when we the people do things like !invest_vote
And again I like to see the advantage of non-evenly distribution: productivity is a standard. If you think you deserve something and it's not coming, don't go after what you expect but after what you do and change it.
See, technically every post is a comment. If a comment looks worth reading why not do a post about it and add a reference to the original thread. More people are going to recognize it within the seven day time period and the posting is going to be rewarded additionally. Until some whales downvote on it and can get hooked on the minimum payout issue.
Perspective determines action. Creativity is a good tool to craft it. !BEER
View or trade
BEER.Hey @logiczombie, here is a little bit of
BEERfrom @andrepol for you. Enjoy it!Learn how to earn FREE BEER each day by staking.
@andrepol denkt du hast ein Vote durch @investinthefutur verdient! ----> Wer ist investinthefutur ?
@andrepol thinks you have earned a vote of @investinthefutur !----> Who is investinthefutur ?
If you don't want to see the content, why not just use the "mute" button?
No need to kick over their tip jar.
True. Well, for the mute part: Mute does not mute content but people. I like people. If I can't see their sh** I might be surprised when it hits the fan. And please get me wrong, I like surprises. But I don't like those brown ones.
Again, I'm excogitating about all this. I don't see it their/my jar but, well, let's name it the commons until it is rewarded. Commons like in (3) land a.k.a. territory. It's not mine, it's not theirs, it's still negotiable. Voting is negotiation, not decision. At least that's what I'm coming to when I excogitate it. !invest_vote
@andrepol denkt du hast ein Vote durch @investinthefutur verdient! ----> Wer ist investinthefutur ?
@andrepol thinks you have earned a vote of @investinthefutur !----> Who is investinthefutur ?
@andrepol denkt du hast ein Vote durch @investinthefutur verdient! ----> Wer ist investinthefutur ?
@andrepol thinks you have earned a vote of @investinthefutur !----> Who is investinthefutur ?
@baah, would you agree that DDOS = FREE-SPEECH?
@gooddream, sorry for the intrusion, but do you happen to have any opinions about abusive downvoting?
As one of the most influential steemit users, your opinion would definitely carry some weight for the rest of us.
Based on our previous conversations, you seem to be a thoughtful and reasonable person.
Congratulations @logiczombie! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :
You can view your badges on your Steem Board and compare to others on the Steem Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPVote for @Steemitboard as a witness to get one more award and increased upvotes!
Maybe I can absorb some of @bloom's downvotes.
They seem to have gone on a minor rampage.