You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Why should anyone have the power to reduce another person's pay-out?
After my flag attack last week because I used poitical humor (npc's), against the left - I was dowvoted for a few days , on everything...
I realized steemit isn't the free speech idea we were sold on.
Downvoting is an aggressive, negative action, against another - one that penalizes , but upvoting isn't - it's a positive action.
Steemit stalwarts can rationalize it all they want - the dynamic is authoritarian in nature , and nothing else.
As someone who has experienced this a few times now I completely sympathise... and agree with you here. It doesn't make sense to me that downvotes must exist alongside upvotes. Yes, I can see situations in which this feature will benefit us but knowing how the power seems to naturally collect into the hands of a few (as money always does) in the end we will always have rich bullies, unless another system is found.
I just finished this meandering 3 minutes ago...you might 'get it'...
https://steemit.com/blog/@lucylin/the-reluctant-revolutionary-really-but-it-has-to-be-said-and-i-m-thinking-communism-meets-capitalism
Since when does the freedom of speech guarantee you a payment? As I mentioned above, upvoting someone else negatively affects your payout also and flagging someone positively affects everybody else's payout. You may not agree with how it works and that's fine but flags existed when you signed up and being here is purely voluntary. Your freedom to say what you want on this platform is not reduced by flags. Upvotes and downvotes (flags) are both votes on how your post should be rewarded. Referring to it as "authoritarian" cheapens the word. This isn't North Korea.