Currently, it is sporadically being used by some members to punish users for expressing a point of view (instead of just rewarding the content they wish to see). Reminiscent of Pavlov's dogs, it seems some wish to condition a response in anyone who may engage in what they feel is "wrongthink".
How do flags/downvotes punish anyone?
Not only is this a proven formula for future stagnation in the community, it opens the possibility for corporations, governments, and other potentially nefarious actors to effectively control what is and isn't allowed on the platform.
How does a flag change what is or isn't allowed? Flagging is not censorship.
Sorry for the late reply, this one snuck past me.
"Punish" in this context can be thought of as "disincentive" for the sake of semantics. When spammers and plagiarists are flagged, it's used as a way to enforce a common standard. However, "opinion flagging" or otherwise downvoting because the author shared the wrong idea/perspective is a highly divisive approach that will fragment this community indefinitely.
All one needs to do is look at youtube to see users flocking in droves due to demonetization, and that's despite google's dominance of the market. Steemit doesn't have that luxury, and demonetizing users by micromanaging the opinions allowed on the platform will exponentially diminish returns in growth and retention.
It's sneaked.