RE: Charity drives on Steem, will not tolerate "Giving 100% of the liquid reward..." (while silently keeping the rest out of pure convenience/greed)
Having raised over $150 toward various charities from my Steemit posts, I believe as long as the poster is upfront by stating clearly what percentage of rewards are to be given as donation should be sufficient for others to decide whether they will support the post with an upvote or not.
If you disagree you are welcome to flag the post however this is a very negative move and could provoke a destructive flag war in which there are no winners, Especially the general Steem community.
I believe Steemit should be a place of positive encouragement and support not vigilante action.
I personally have used my own fiat currency to make donations which keeps steem locked up rather than putting downward pressure on pricing and in effect is the same as me powering up those funds.
I agree with @surfermarly that stand alone charitable intitiatives should have their own account but even this is not without questions such as who controls the funds etc.
I post under an account of my own name and have nothing to hide. An anonymous vigilante flagging things they feel are against the ethos of Steemit will not help this community grow but will lead to its distruction. I witnessed many good Steemians walk away from this platform due to indiscriminate vigilante flag wars. Use your not inconsiderable Steem power positively rather than punitively.
I'd say it's the opposite, sometime it takes a level of anonymity to be able to say to things that are not popular (not that I'm anonymous BTW). As long as the person is communicative and explain it's action I don't see why you think pseudonimity is a problem.
The use of the downvote is all about effectiveness. Upvoting positive things and turning a blind eye on abuses is pure complacency.
How is advocating for accountability and openness when taking money on behalf of charities indiscriminate?
I only mention your account as anonymous as you have no profile pic of any kind, no external web link for any form of external verification. I support your right to have that and agree if you are going to take a personal stand on something I believe you should also be accountable for your actions.
I am all for accountability and verification. Whenever I make a donation from one of my posts highlighting the charity or cause i am supporting I post proof of contribution, and in the case of KIVA regular updates to the repayment and redistribution of those funds.
I am a mere minnow here on Steemit and you are a mighty Whale, I realise more and more what the minnows believe is overruled by a small group of whales and don’t know if that makes for a healthy community and sounds more like an oligarchy at best.
i am Fucking @transisto sis and mother
i am Fucking @transisto sis and mother
I don't believe anonymity to be a problem here. And I'm not sure I see flagging as solely negative. It can be positive. And in this case, I believe @transisto has crafted a suggestion that takes into consideration the charity, the blogger and Steemit. Simply put - to paraphrase, 'state your distribution intentions up front'. My guess is, if as curators, we were all to promote and follow @transisto 's advice, genuine humanitarians woulod be thankful. However, a mechanism to audit the distribution is still lacking but may come with SMTs in the Oracle and Oracle QA 'White Paper' soon to be released released by @ned .