You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Is the Steem social contract being abused? Steem funds are to be used to sponsor unrelated projects.

in #steem8 years ago (edited)

In my eyes this is subject of one's individual sense of loyalty. But when bigger picture is considered, Steem is meant to be the an ultimately democratic platform, where you can upvote whatever you want, write whatever you want and downvote whatever you want. Thus telling people what they should and shouldn't write is not exactly in line with these assumptions.
Also note that you are allowed to spend your dollars made on Steem on whatever you want including guns, hookers and all, and although I understand that the very post is trying to raise money for some external cause and has no other value, no one can force anyone to upvote or downvote it if they don't find it meaningful or harmful.
But of course, you can campaign against it like you just did - that is also your sacred right. But if Steem decided to ban this by definition, started removing or blocking posts like that, or having official committees deciding what goes and what doesn't, I would be very alarmed, even if the causes happened to be completely unrelated, for example some babe getting a new botox implant ;) And I do get that you are not advocating for that, not to mention that it is by definition impossible to censor stuff here, at least theoretically.
Still, Steem has to pull its weight through all the freedom it introduces - that would be my closing line on this one.

Sort:  

But if Steem decided to ban this by definition, started removing or blocking posts like that, or having official committees deciding what goes and what doesn't, I would be very alarmed.

So would I. If Steem ever acquires a committee able to block posts, I'll be gone. My post was only meant to counteract @jonnybitcoin's post and raise the issue of a clear conflict of interest taking place.

Also, I wanted to prevent this perception from spreading:

Steem is used by BitShares shareholders to acquire new investors and then use their capital to salvage their own failed BitShares investment.

It's completely untrue (and I don't think BitShares is a failed investment) but we need to be aware that perception is not a rational beast - it just needs one small incident to be able to flourish.

Yeah I get you :) As long it's just an opinion like any other, its all good. Like you said, perception is hardly rational, everyone has their own version of it, so there's little else one can do except campaign for the outcomes they're after. Even if they seem to be talking rubbish in the process (which I'm not trying to judge in this case).