Steem/IT is used by ordinary people and keeps growing, the investors aren't holding anyone back and almost all of the ideas offered are immature or haven't been considered carefully in exactly what other problems would be created, as for example the multitude that scream Curation equated to Censorship, which in my eyes is akin to killing in Self Defense being equated to Murder, yes killing someone in self defense is not nice, but it's not murder and a complete necessity and not a "protecting muh investment/strategy", yet that doesn't stop people for calling Curation Censorship regardless that for censorship to exist in the very first place it, in it's most base form even, at least one thing must be present:Centralized Authority and/or a mechanism to actually Censor, and not simply Hide/Rate content as Hidden by Default, content that can be simply accessed by using a different front-end and even brute force Spamming until the person's or persons's voting power is drained, regardless of how large the account is because the bandwidth limitation makes Flagging crap for "censorship" and there have been numerous suggestions proposed that hardly consider the numerous problems that they would introduce or even less consider the problem that they are trying to fix as not a problem but a feature and instead are convinced that their understanding of censorship and curation is understood when it hardly could be called considered.

Here is a question for you and all alike: Is flagging in the interest of the various stakeholders or in the interest of the community, and how can you explain that it is in the interest of stakeholders?

I'm tired of the rhetoric of "those greedy investors" and only hope that someone else will have the balls to ridicule such nonsense besides me.