RE: Would you support an anti-abuse proposal?
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
Voted for
- Yes
I voted yes, but only for steemflagrewards.
Some flag groups (I won't name names) I never supported their methods. I never thought it is fair to incentive people to flag posts for profit. Some become careless, greedy, and even toxic against the people they downvote. Guilty until proven authentic is the upside-down law I have witnessed by certain blockchain crusaders. It is very scary communicating with them on discord when they are threatening you for questioning them.
Cowboy justice on a modern blockchain seems to be accepted by most, simply because they can. I think we should have a more responsible system to avoid harsh penalties of permanent blacklisting and downvotes on all content (for life!).
There does not seem to be any system in place to counter-act for-profit flaggers, other than retaliation. Maybe by openly weeding out for-profit flaggers not aligned with the approved flagging proposals, maybe it will turn the tides towards accountability. Flaggers should earn what they deserve for cleaning up the worst stuff, rather than over-doing it and earning as much as they are capable of. The proposal system should keep the amount of flags at a level most people are happy with, so it does not get out of hand (too many or too few).
I like any system that puts all flaggers underneath some system of global community governance. If many of them behave poorly, they should all be penalized. If they mostly perform admirably, they should all be rewarded.
The complexity of that organization would have to be better thought out as they move forward.
By moving the funding to the DHF, I hope some of that leverage would be given back to stakeholders.
If other initiatives wish to circumvent that, they better come up with their own method of funding/support that does not involve the reward pool.