I do not like down voting at all I think you can deal with someone you do not agree with by just not looking at anything they have to say. I feel that everyone has a right to express what they think, but it does not mean every one must read what they say. I have always thought that everyone has around 20% of the people who agree with them, another 20% disagree and the other 60% do not care what you say. We should not use down voting to censor someone. Everyone should be able to express themselves.
Do you think people who plagiarize content deserve to be paid out? Flagging is the only way to remove the payout from a post right now.
And more importantly spam. If we don't flag spam it will be rewarded, and if spam is rewarded then the spammers will descend like a swarm of locusts until the network is completely desolate and uninhabitable by legitimate users.
What is spam. Everyone has their own definition on what spam is. So who says what we can say. I go back to my statement of the 20% agree 20% disagree and the rest do not care. We need to talk about all things not stop the conversation. Look at what is happening at US Colleges only liberals have the right of free speech. It use to be only the conservatives had the right of free speech. I think they should both have the right to free speech. This will give us freedom.
I am less concern about payout and more concern about censorship. If the person who was plagiarized is harmed let them take the person to court. We need less restrictions on thought not more restrictions.
So you want the courts and government stepping in to police things on steemit instead of the community? I feel much more comfortable having the users of the platform decide these issues.
Also, think about censorship on steemit. If you are on facebook or youtube and they decide to censor your material then it is removed and nobody can see it. If your post is flagged on steemit everyone still has full access to what you wrote, it just takes an additional click of a mouse. Is an additional click really censorship compared to all the other platforms out there that actually remove material?
No I did not say the courts decide what is on Steemit. I said the person who's work was copied could go after the people who copied it. I said nothing about the government controlling what is on steemit.
I think if you flag it that should be all that is done because you also have the freedom of speech. However, I do not think any additional click of a mouse should be required for other people to see the material.
When you say the person whose work was copied should go after the people who copied it, how else do you expect that to happen if not through the courts/government?
Lets say someone comes along and decides to copy a post from @richard78624 word for word, repost it as their own and it gets $100 dollars in upvotes because of course it was a quality post to begin with. What you are saying is that you should go to court and have the court tell that plagiarizer he needs to take that post down and compensate you for stealing your material.
How is that not involving the courts?
I see it differently then you. I see the courts as saying my work was being used by someone else and I should be compensated and that work deleted. It is not policing what can go on STEEMIT it is only preventing copyrighted material that the person who has the copyright does not want there. I think that is a big difference form policing what is on STEEMIT as you first stated.
But you are saying you want a court to be able to tell a person on steemit to take a post down. I agree plagiarized posts should be taken down, I just feel that the community doing it on its own is better than going through the court system.