Upvoted for the interesting topic and what I suspect will be an interesting conversation.
I have mixed feelings on this, and I have caught myself making conflicting decisions. I don't go on about the issues of stake often. Yet, it feels different for me to downvote and have a small impact. Then it seems when I watch those with very high steem power downvote. I don't like scammy people, but I subscribe to the ideals of buyer beware.
On a personal note, I feel like I have learned a lot in the past 10 months or so, yet, I appreciate the feedback from those who have more experience than I do. I don't appreciate being "protected" by scam flaggers.
Nearly every time I have spoken out against a group or account, what bothers me is false pumping up by those with the largest's stakes "ganging up or down" on posts. My view on this is still being refined, which is why I look forward to the conversation.
As a community we also need to teach the concept of "Buyer Beware" and not just try to "Flag Protect" the community. I don't want to teach people "learned helplessness" because others are trying to protect them. It has become top of my list to define my views on this.
I think it has less to do with trying to protect others than it is an expression of, "I'm not going to accept this as a stakeholder myself." Yes, by bringing attention to an issue through commenting and flagging the post, other users might be influenced by that, but it's mostly an exercise for the individual flagging. It's ultimately up to each user to determine whether or not they will support or not support a given project, regardless of how others have voted. As @scaredycatguide said below in another comment - it's all about due diligence.
Regarding last night's post, I flagged it because I saw it as a blatant attempt to scam people and I felt that it would do damage to the reputation of this platform if it continued and if people were duped into giving them money. That damage has a direct effect on me as a stakeholder. So, I voted my economic interests just as much as my moral ones.
I don't intend to protect any individual person from themselves. If they want to buy into a scam, then that's on them. But if I can identify it and feel that it does harm to my own investments, I will express my concerns and vote accordingly, as we all should, no matter the size of our wallets.
You made the best argument I have heard to my position. I like it. I think the only part that bothers me is the UI graying it out. Thank you taking the time to "Argue" and help me refine my view.
Interesting that you should choose to make a post about morality and "bad actors" when you are one of the biggest trolls on the platform.
I don't want people to think it's okay to say "I choose to answer what questions I want and ignore the ones that would obviously prove I am not a scammer." It isn't about protecting anything but our own investment to most of us. The whales supporting this horse shit also ignored the extremely easy to answer question I brought up multiple times and instead upvote comments to save their reputation and promote an agenda. Let's see maybe after upvoting all of these "neutral" comments and putting their reputation on the line for this guy they can ignore me again. "Why not put the money in a smart contract or multi-sig with a trusted third party agreed upon by the community?" I will be amazed if I don't get ignored again.
Agreed, the behavior of the OP and those who were vocally supporting it (including how they ignored your question and others) is what inspired me to make any comments and eventually flag the post.
Very well said. I agree with you on this.
Agreed .
This post is an eye-opener.
Thanks