We will likely have to agree to disagree on the relationship between inflation rewards and free speech.
I think free speech can thrive independent of inflation rewards, and these rewards can (and in my view, should) be allocated in a manner largely independently of free speech.
The fact that you can post on the platform at all, and that communities and apps can be built to cultivate visibility and utility on the platform independent of inflation rewards, including with different methods for monetization or no monetization, is sufficient for free speech to thrive.
Of course, it is up to stakeholders to decide. If people want to buy in and financially reward 'free speech content' for it's own sake without exercising further discretion on content and value, that is as legitimate as any other vote. If you don't agree with my views, then vote differently.
They did. That's why this platform exists at all. The blogging aspect wasn't tacked on. It was the mechanism that generated value underlying the token. Speech is the basis for Hive's very existence, and your comment indicates your disregard for that fundamental aspect of Hive.
We do disagree on that.
Yes that's fine. People can vote to direct rewards a certain way, and others can vote a different way. The votes are added up and so it goes.
Speech, and even free speech, as compared to REWARDING specific content with stake inflation rewards are not the same thing. There are other ways to monetize content, including all the ways that exist on every other site on the internet. Those are available on Hive too, with fewer obstacles in terms of demonetization and censorship.
Stake inflation rewarding is not and should not be indiscriminate. It is a consensus process. Where stakeholders agree, rewards are paid, where stakeholders disagree, rewards are not paid, or are paid in less amounts. If we disagree on that, so be it. Hive on.