You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: FatKat Becomes Grumpycat VoteBuyer Compliant
Grumpycat has demonstrated his legitimacy
Legitimacy? No. This is not legitimate power.
Grumpycat has demonstrated his legitimacy
Legitimacy? No. This is not legitimate power.
depend how you define legitimate, I mean no one will stop him especially if the bots dont care even about teh collateral damage. I hope Grumpy Cat will be ok with me trying to save the collateral damage, he seems reasonable as long as he gets to make things into the vision he wants, and it is his power and he has earned it.
It is his illegitimate power and he has not earned it. He is altering the rights of others without their permission, which is what makes his power illegitimate.
If these are rights why are they not in the algorhithm so they are not up to the whim of a grumpycat? You know my opinion. And I agree steem would be best to transform these institutionalized anti social interactions. But if does not then perhaps someone will fork it and make it work to uplift our world run amok.
The system was built on libertarian values, with the extremes of libertarianism being anarchy. The non-aggression principle wasn't adhered to when the developers included punishment via flagging, so certain libertarian concepts are missing.
No one has the legitimate right to stop Grumpycat any more than Grumpycat has the right to stop other people. It's what anarchists think they want until they see it happening.
interesting ideas. I think Dr. Friedman had it right that we need to get the wrong people to do the right thing
@grumpycat has stated many times and with his down votes of why. Disagreement on payout is a valid down vote. Disagreement on abuse is a valid downvote. @grumpycat has stated many times that the 3.5 days upvote is in his opinion abuse of the reward pool. Use of non compliant bots by individuals is considered abuse and reward pool theft thus reward disagreement on the part of @grumpycat. There is absolutely no reason to feel "sorry" for any individual that @grumpycat flags. He does not care if you are a Rep of 25 or 75 he will downvote as he said a "random" bot abuser. He has done what he stated he would do.
No such thing for either of these statements. Grumpy cat warned the bot owners what would happen, he has made post to let people know what will happen, if bot owners did not inform their clients that they may be downvoted/flagged by @grumpycat, then it is the bot owner that is responsible for the collateral damage.
@grumpycat invested his money and powered that investment up. There is nothing illegitimate to the power he controls. Anyone that wants the same power that he has can invest, or purchase, or rent it, from any number of places.
Wrong - the abuse of illegitimate power by the like of @grumpycat isn't something to applaud. You'll learn that for yourself, someday.
hes demonstrated that with money he can attack the helpless in an attempt to manipulate him