These kind of behaviours, if correctly proved like is the case should be mean the ban of any account. Idk, why the hell there aren't proposals to implement this or other similar tools. Of course should be very consensuated, but are very needed indeed.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I cannot support banning any account but i think the community should be aware of those that act like this, thus this post.
Be aware, and don't act in any way, except apart him from everyone else?, Do you think that a measure like that could persuade to a person who threatens others?. People here and in Steemit seem to confuse between decentralization and desregulation. You know that threatening others is a crime in many countries right?, so why not ban an account for that?.
So you can literally kill people of a social media like this for dunno what reason, and still no one will support banning no one, because we're very liberals. Totally absurd.
Your grasp of decentralization seems very loose. Hive is not an attempt to impose authority. Rather the goal of Hive is to enable sovereignty. These principles are opposed.
You may be more comfortable on a centralized platform given your desire to conform users to authority.
There is no need to inform to authorities if we are responsible for what we do as individuals, there is no right to threat other people. And is a crime not only legally but moraly as well.
Of what sovereignty are you talking about if we as community allow this kind of behaviours? and do nothing about it, is that a political concept of freedom or what?.
And don't need a centralized platform, in fact I don't use facebook, twitter nor other social media but this. Can you afirm the same?, I don't want a centralized platform but a responsible one.
What sovereignty do you have if you are only allowed it? You do not grasp that your freedom to do and say what you want isn't the only sovereignty there is.
If you oppose @heimindanger's actions, you are free to flag him. That retains your and his sovereignty. If you call for banning, or imposition of other institutional mechanisms, you oppose his sovereignty, and prove yours does not exist. Your call for institutional action is a call for actual power to effect your desires, and only issues as a result of your lack of it.
Even the guy posting self insert child porn fan fictions? You don't want him banned?
Shunned. Not banned.
This is the difference between centralization and decentralization.
Do you have any idea how disheartening it was to start out on this platform and having all your posts downvoted because you called out a pedo? lol I even told aggroed who wont shut the fuck up about disney pedos and he didn't care at all.
I have been serially flagged by a ninjamine whale, so I do empathize.
The fact is the community will respond organically, and does not need top down bans to shun malignant actors. Bans of any kind for any reason are just the tip. Getting shafted always follows.
There was a child porn person back in the days, but the one thing the community could control was the image hosting.
The posts, of course, sit as empty husks on the chain.
I direct you to my most recent post as evidence such control is both unnecessary, and incapable of preventing such criminal speech.