An @informationwar themed, meme. Same freespeech, different things to say...
This is the first critical commentary I have ever, ever directed at @informationwar..
And hopefully my last..
I just commented on the @informationwar post. (the part concerning 'being asked to be someone's personal army')
...Ah fuck it - here it is..
A few issues have happened lately with a couple of users calling us out and or calling us to be their personal army,
I really take issue with this.
Just in case you hadn't already noticed.
Is the 'Trudeau philosophy' now taking hold?
If you out argue them, they win... , or something..
Or perhaps it more a case of...
' if you compromise your beliefs because of external pressure and stifle your right free speech..
...we win
...that way we don't actually have to do any fighting to defend the very the ethos that we promote..?
.....mmmm
If you want a civilized war, you don't want war - you are looking at something different...You want a game, to play..
THIS IS NOT A FUCKIN' GAME..
So, in the spirit of this 'calling on us to be their personal army' , I thought I would illustrate my thoughts, through mime meme.
Hey hey.
I clarified some things a bit better and outlined some more stuff. I updated point number 2 so that it reflects more of the questions that I was going to ask. That blog post was just a brief agenda that was going to be expanded on at the Sunday meeting that anyone could attend. Rest assured I was going to go into detail on many scenarios.
Here is what I updated it to.
2 . Talk over guidelines for curating/questions/concerns. I think we will leave things mostly the same in curating. Establish some kind of process for reviewing fellow InformationWar posters who are getting flagged. Why are they getting flagged? Is it more than one flag? Is there potential to reconcile the flags with the flagger? If no reconciliation what would our next steps be? Who else can we get involved for such things, there is a project that exists like @freezepeach and maybe some others(what are other projects that neutralize flagging?) A few issues have happened lately with a couple of users calling us out and or calling us to be their personal army, to be involved in fights that they either started or didn't start, and they are or the flagger are prolonging for an extended duration(with or without them trying to resolve any conflict). As it stands right now we don't really have any criteria for what to do about these things. In the past we have upvoted posts that have been flagged.
Wanna have a chat in discord? I could go over our entire history of what we have done and we can talk through some stuff if you would like.
TruthForce#9168
Upvoted and resteemed, as all criticism is welcome!
This is a really good thing to do! I' mean opening up a dialog and with in that dialog ask what is the right thing for us to do about the problem. I sure hope people acknowledge how they feel is up to them, but we must be able to discuss without blaming each other for how we feel. That road will cause exactly opposite of a solution.
Instead lets put forth a maturity of mind too discover that which is best for our liberty, freedom and responsibility as brothers and sisters.
Free Speech is not and never was free. One should know that legally there is no definition for the word free, because such is a concept that has no relations to a something going on in the real world.
I have been flagged and the first time it happened I got all but hurt. In truth I exercised my speech and so did the flag-er. What I figured out for me, (no one else) is that in truth we both paid the price of that exercise. I realized that if our free speech is going to have value, we must accept the consequences of that value.
To be flagged by a jerk because they disagreed with your post to me is a badge of honor. It is the proof that you exercise your freedom of speech and so do other's. It is clear that in truth everything has a cost and for that reason we need to recognize that free doesn't exist in reality. Thus if we are going to act we must do so in acceptance of the consequences.
Two be flagged by a person who than comments and explains (not justify), why they felt the adjustment of value to your post was valid.
Does you a favor and corrects you about the facts. If it where easy it would not be motivating. So to sum up what I am sharing is.
1.) Free Speech is an action that fallows natural law precisely.
2.) Emotions are generated by the individual and is not ever the responsibility of someone else!
3.) Free Speech is not and never was free!
Truth is a natural law unto itself and is intrinsic value in and of its self. Speaking or not speaking the truth always has consequences. This is what I think @lucylin is addressing. We should all be thankful that he spoke a truth. Flags are being used as political statements that are contrary to our society ethics. He has suggested a solution.
Personally I do not think ignoring lucylin would be operating in truth. His solution may be implemented by individuals if they agree that the flag was as characterized no matter what. That is freedom after all.
@TruthForce is I think stepping up to engage. I think we all should be thinking about solutions that produce less political use of the flags. Come to the meeting with it.
https://minnow-power.net/redirect/?user=commonlaw%230&url=%2Finformationwar%2F%40informationwar%2Finformationwar-meeting-sunday-6pm-cst-7pm-est
That is my two bits.
And still being flagged....
Ever noticed that bullies carry on there behavior until checked....?
..of course vote wise, I'm the little kid in the corner having his sweets taken off me.
@ and informationwars is the big dude that can stop it.
when I have no sweeties left....who's next...
The thing is, my sweeties are actually part my real food, in my world - not some concept..
And informationwars is the dude that came into the playground offering the free speech to all the kids..
but let's the bully take the sweets..
....and they wonder why the left win against the sane...
Hey @lucylin, did you see the response I left on your post you made?
This is something we are going to figure out how to deal with. With our recent loss of delegation due to factors not known to us and outside of our control, bloom and others have a lot more SP than we do just to let you know. If we did a 100% upvote we might not be able to neutralize it at this point. Ausbitbank provided something like a 30,000 SP bonus and tribesteemup was around 13,000 or so.
In the past with the vote from ausbitbank/tribesteemup it would be trivial to neurtalize bloom's downvotes. We are working with a limited amount of SP at this moment and it is why I am holding a meeting tomorrow to discuss these things and strategies.
Check out the comment I left on your post.
In the meantime have you tried reaching out to Bloom to see why they are downvoting and if there is a possibility of reconciling?
Thanks.
.......'cos I'm stupid about steemit voting - please feel free to educate me.
I mean that.
10 x 100% of bloomy .. = 10 x0.46
10 x 100% of IW = 10 x 0.37
so if every bloomy votes was countered by a votes on IW.. the net effects of bloomy's attacks on any infowarrior (in a 24 hour period)...
......... would 10 x 0.09 cents?
If I'm correct - which I'm not saying I am - then - to me - it would seem like a valid strategy.
More than valid actually - a very good one.
The deterrent (almost no effect on 10 different posts would (imo), stop the attacks...
After individual warriors upvoting other warriors post who were under attack - - it would be net loss (ineffective) daily, for bloomy...
It would stop.
(just sayin' - if my premise is correct of course..)