OK, I'll bite. What do you believe the solution might be? Or what should happen?
If we do away with flags, there's no longer ANY disincentive for someone to come in here and do something "scammy" to fill their pockets, haejin style.
If we say "Steemit needs to ban scammy accounts" then the whole freedom, and non-censorship and — for that matter — the idea of decentralization goes right down the toilet... Steemit basically become "Farcebook with tokens."
But this seems to have wandered a bit from the original discussion of Steemit as a Ponzi.
Just my opinion would be that if someone filed a compliant because their wallet was zero'd out over abuse they'd be found to have abused the monetary system, the current system in place to deal with abusers would more than likely be found adequate given it's a new technology. Therefore it would seem to me their complaint would be unfounded based on abuse/fraud/scam, on the other hand zeroing out someone's account because you didn't like what they said would be considered illegal, just as illegal as if someone said something you didn't like and walked into a bank and emptied your account out over it. You have to use reasonable judgement when reaching beyond flagging a article or comment over something said into their wallet for further punishment versus doing so over abuse/fraud/scams. Every system it would seem to me has to have it's safeguards, this is unfolding new technology, there has to be a way to reign in bad actors but that same reign doesn't stretch to those wanting to use it for censorship.