You cannot call it censorship genius because not one BYTE has been altered, the content is the same as it was posted. To censor something the ability to alter content is required. If you cannot change the content then you fail at "censoring", furthermore since nobody can stop someone from posting or speaking their mind when and where they want it's not suppressive to flag the content and make it by default replaced with a clearly visible and intriguing button that says "REVEAL HIDDEN POSTS". The point about censorship is that regulations over the blockchain would indeed be CENSORSHIP, and they would be trespassing on the freedom of expression, which ties in directly to what I was telling the author of this post: flagging is nothing more than someone's opinion on your content. You cannot silence anyone with CURATION. Hence that is why calling Curation TERRORIZING is so ridiculous, and then to equate it to Censorship when it has none of the elements of censorship (least a centralized position of power that "censors") is a stretch. If you bring those arguments before a judge you better realize that he might even side with you but he will tell you straight up that it doesn't matter because you cannot enforce YOUR OPINION on other people, which is essentially what being entitled to no negative opinions in a public forum is nonsense and contrary to the very basic principles of freedom of expression.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
https://decentralize.today/the-ugly-truth-behind-steemit-1a525f5e156
Censorship comes in many forms, intimidation is one of them. The material may stay on a page but the damage is done through ruining people's reputations and flagging their accounts to a loss.