You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: My thoughts on flags for disagreement on rewards

in #flags7 years ago (edited)

Well said. And I would add to that, just because someone has the right within the system to do something - because it is encoded in the software which is supported by witness consensus - doesn't mean it is a good right, and certainly not that everyone will like it.

In my opinion any rule book that equates wealth to power and has an extremely unbalanced distribution of wealth will result in a system that prioritizes wealth and preservation of wealth over life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. IMO Steemit fails badly there both in existing wealth distribution and equating wealth to curating power. Why not use reputation instead which can be earned and removed by the community?

Sort:  

Well said. Nothing that doesn't violate the NAP should receive negative treatment. I've posted over 15 comments on the matter on today alone. My standing is that nobody has the right to decide what anybody deserve and only has the right to act against a person who violate the NAP.

I can go to an country with an absolute monarchy. Get a diplomatic immunity and shoot a person in the head. The physics will work. The gun will work. No physical or legal laws will be broken. But that doesn't make it right. It just simply works within a system.