Hold up, I vote baah on day 6 trying to restore his rep where he can be seen.
He may be an ass in how he delivers his viewpoints, but he has as much right to voice his opinion as anybody else.
Skeptic spammed graphic gay porn, iirc.
He created the banners on many of my accounts.
I wish he would come back.
I doubt he would get what he got absent the bernster.
Logiczombie invited what he got, as did many others I have seen wiped out.
There are others you have missed.
It isn't about politics, it's more about deportment when called on their bs.
Defaming/slandering somebody with more stake is not a winning tactic in these situations.
I follow most of the flags in the hive and I see very little unwarranted flagging.
If it wasn't for marky, and others, flagging spam we would be overrun by it.
You can understand why spammers/plagiarizers would get vocal when their easy money gets cut off, yes?
How come I haven't been wiped out for calling out the 20 accounts taking 50% of the daily reward pool if it is about politics?
I have some of the most fringe politics on the platform.
Excepting cyberdemon521, who is currently being flagged by marky for selfvoting for multiple years, and I vote them on day 6, too.
They agreed to stop selfvoting, they post on 3speak after I asked them to stop posting utub links, I think marky should lighten up a little, but see his viewpoint as valid.
I am very vocal about my viewpoint.
Yet, here I am, after 6 years of voicing my very fringe opinions, ignored by some as a lunatic, but not wiped out by the whales.
If more people joined in our 'cabal' and voiced their opinions in the conversations perhaps what we do as a collective would be more suited to their viewpoints.
Or, their viewpoint would be more informed by the facts.
Most of what is flagged by hive-dr is consensus driven.
Marky does his own thing, but most of the rest is presented to the group for our opinions before it gets wiped.
Flagging things is not going away, the best we can hope for is that the crowd gets it right.
When folks refuse to join the crowd there is nothing we can do about it.
Flagging abuse is the duty of every stakeholder.
In before he calls you a cabal collaborator.
Many people may not know this, but you and I have disagreed on several occasions. But, that never escalates into problems.
I actually find @baah pretty funny a lot of times.
Yes, we are not as homogeneous as people like to portray us.
I think the problem comes in when folks get emotional about being told they are wrong.
Their cognitive dissonance sets in and they respond emotionally.
Which evokes an emotional response all around.
This is why I continue to ask people to join the conversations.
More viewpoints, better crowd sourcing.
He is a cabal collaborator, and I thanked him for it (maybe that's down further). I'd thank you for it if you weren't opinion flagging and were just flagging spam, scams, and plagiarism. @baah is pretty funny, but is the only account I've ever muted.
He's inexorable, God bless him.
I don't recall ever flagging @baah, though. No promises, as my recollections are vague, and getting vaguer as I age.
But, while I grant that @antisocialist has a point and things seem to have gotten better than they were, as some accounts that were being flagged hard have been let up on, and accounts that were inactive because they were flagged hard have come back, opinion flagging is as terrible a weakness as @ned's stake proved to be.
It could destroy Hive in the wrong hands, and I reckon it will unless ya'll prevent it.
I hope you're right, but I don't think that there's a lot of users that would simply keep posting if they were flagged so hard they could not gain rewards. You are more durable and intent on speaking the truth than most, as I am sure you know.
A well funded group determined to cancel wrongthink would be able to cancel most of those they targeted. While I think Hivewatchers are the former, I don't think they are truly focused on wrongthink, and sometimes just get pissed off at folks and take them out, instead of only acting on spam, scams, and plagiarism. Ideally they wouldn't act against mere insults, but there've been cases where verbal abuse rose to the level of criminal offense. IANAL, but such cases may have to be dealt with to protect Hive from legal jeopardy.
I think marky, as @antisocialist says, does as he chooses a lot, and doesn't necessarily seek consensus. The problem isn't with marky, but with the code that enables opinion flagging because that potentiates a group dedicated to actual censorship to take people out.
My problem is that I cannot conceive of code that can potentiate censoring spam, scams, and plagiarism that doesn't enable censoring Democrats, Communists, or any particular flavor of political speech just as easily. Spam, scams, and plagiarism need to be flagged into the dust, and that ability only isn't toxic to free speech if those that wield it refuse to exercise their power against those they disagree with.
I can see no way to code that. We are left dependent on goodwill, which doesn't always work even when angels wield that power, and sure as hell won't work when devils have it.
Oh trust me, we have more in common than you think.
!lol
Does it matter why we love you, or just that we find a reason to do it?
We are all human and deserve respect.
When we forget that we lose what it is we are trying to be, decent human beings.
Hang in there, baah, we will get you visible again just as soon as you stop making large stake holders sooo upset.
I read it. It's extremely well written, but your definition of censorship is not shared by most, and much different than that given by authoritative sources. Censorship does not need to be systemic, nor total, so I disagree with that.
Anyway, you walk your talk, which is far more important IMHO.