Even though I have seen "opinions" on here that I do not agree with in the slightest I have only used the flag ability once and that was because someone posted a picture that needed an NSFW tag without one.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Hiya insick
Yes, the flag option is apparently there to highlight people who are deliberately scamming the system.
For example: a vegan recipe using the tag #bitcoin is an example or hardcore porn without the NSFW tag. I still disagree with flagging though and think a decentralised platform should run without the flags.
Thanks for your comment
Anj :)
Well in the case of NSFW I disagree. Simply because just imagine you browsing steemit in public or around your boss if at work or not and suddenly a picture of a naked person poping up. However you explain it, it will impact the opinion people have on you and it would be sad if you had to stop browsing steemit in public.
Decentralized or not a group of people still gives themselves rules which everyone should abide by. The only difference is if the rules are made by more or less consensus or given by a certain group of people.
You make a great point, insick. This has happened to me in front of people I know. I just laughed it off and we all got on with our lives. What they think of me is their business, not something I worry about. Someone once sent me a dick pic which I opened in public too. It taught me to only click on trustable people when I'm surrounded by witnesses :P
Dunno if it's obvious yet, but I'm against any form of censorship :D
I don't think it is censorship if you are asked to simply proclaim the right topics for your post and not abiding by rules and being called out for it I don't consider censorship either.
Let's just try a little example:
A company is selling sweets. On the packaging it says chocolate eggs but inside are gummy bears. A paper now calls them out on it and their sales drop. Would you consider this a form of censorship because the freedom of the company is taken away to sell their gummy bears as chocolate eggs? (I am specifically assuming in this case that no consumer protection steps in and actually forces them to take the product off the market because that would be a kind of censorship if it was valid or not is a completely other discussion. I am just assuming that because the newspaper called them out their sales drop massively)
In my opinion this is what applies if you falsely tag a food picture as bitcoin related or don't tag NSFW content as such. Maybe the system needs to be changed meaning in which ways you are able to call someone out over such a thing but I think you should be able to.
Edit: also I wouldn't worry about NSFW pictures when I am around my friends we would look at them together but sometimes and especially me working at a bar I am around customers or my boss while I am not working and that wouldn't make too good of an impression.
Hiya insick
I have no problem with people calling out that sort of issue in the comments. I have no problem people muting that person for being deceptive. If enough people started muting abusers, they would soon run out of audience. I have a problem with other people deciding my content for me (using censorship).
Gummy bears/chocolate eggs: the paper can call them out (just like in the comments section), but if they somehow found a way to hide the product from the consumer, they are taking the role of censors. Besides, a savvy public would soon gossip about the misleading confectionery and the company would either have to adjust its marketing strategy or risk going out of business. Just as a misleading blogger here would if he were to continue duping people into sampling his product.
I used to manage people. If I caught any of them on their phone when they were supposed to be working I'd call them out on it whether the content was NSFW or not :P
Cheers
Anj :)