You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: @freezepeach: The Flag Abuse Neutralizer

Agreed, which is why with the flag as it is I won't flag someone just because I disagree with them because their views still deserve to be seen. If the flag were instead a downvote that didn't hide the material but just effected the monetary reward? I would use it on things I disagree with because while I wholeheartedly agree they should remain visible, I don't agree that just because you write a post that it is entitled to a reward.

Sort:  

Perhaps the function should be split into two user-interface items?

Allow downvoting to remove funding; and have flagging which makes it invisible?

I'm fairly new here (a month or so), and know that I need to read the whitepaper for better understanding, but it seems that a simple split would resolve your quandary.

As far as the money aspect, that's what I need to know more for -- i.e., should the flagging cost the same as the downvoting? My initial guess is it should cost more, as blocking something is a stronger action. Cheers!