I am supposed to vote for whoever I want. My reasons are my reasons. I should not be punished for it.
Your account name ironically contradicts your belief my friend. Voting is part of freedom of expression; yet you seem to think that there is a certain way everyone should vote, and that those who didn't vote that way should be punished. Please tell me how that is an embodiment of the first amendment. If you truly wished to maintain a freedom of expression, and a diversity of opinions, you would argue against the blacklist entirely.
Not sure why you jumped in out of no where, but sometimes it is difficult to jump in I suppose. I didn't say you couldn't vote, I didn't tell anyone how they should vote, I just said I didn't like the three option and explained why.
You are not voting specifically for who you want to vote as you allude in your premise; you are voting for column A, B, or neither.
I didn't say you couldn't vote, I didn't tell anyone how they should vote, i just said I didn't like the three option and explained why.
Although there might be a blacklist for spammers or other abusers outside of these debates, none of the people cut off from the air drop were blacklisted. They were not air dropped. Some continued to get residual hive rewards from their steem chain activity even if they didn't get the air drop, others could just invest in hive, some delegated hive directly to people left out of the air drop.
Though there might be a court somewhere to construe voting rights with the first amendment, textually and historically that is not the case. It is a mix of a representative democracy in the states chose to adopt from English house of commons, and derivatives from the Holy Roman empire commonly referred to as an electoral college at the national level in which the common man originally had no say. In the elections where people did have a say, it was typically for the head of house-which in some states included women but they kept voting federalists and subsequently lost that right.
I am not sure if there is a means to salvage your supposed firstamendment/voting claim, particularly when I specifically left the option to petition which is explicitly in the text of the first amendment. At best your arguments may fall more appropriately on due process grounds if this were an actual government. The code is law judge and jury had its mistakes, and made decisions ex parte and could not measure true intent. I don't think there wasn't really time to investigate anyways. I am favorable of people peacefully petitioning to be justly, proportionately, and easily compensated in hive for any mistakes caused in the forking process or other accidents before hand.
In the end your argument in opposing mine boils down to rewarding a set of people (Your_set-my_set) who engaged in knowing and willing felonious conspiracies to take over the ownership of steem [or otherwise have no interest in hive]. The true core of your desired set chose the Felon Justin Sun even with a fair warning about the fork, so please explain why that vote shouldn't be binding when they also had the requisite intent to cause harm in Justin Sun's criminal conspiracy.