It can be used to destroy one account's reputation, yes. Destroying one account and destroying one accounts reputation are not equivalent. These post are mostly from the same users who feel entitled to the rewards their content receives but not the flags, ever, for whatever reason. The point is that saying it's censorship is simply crying and whining about what other people think of your stuff, I have yet to get an answer to Why is calling flagging censorship so important and what does it try to resolve? It's important because the story relies on Poor Me, the big bad people picked on poor meeeee, and it seeks to resolve as "he's bad because he flagged me".
I have been flagged, and not once did I resort to "defending" myself with petty threats, or SPAMMING GAY PORN. There is nothing worse on this platform than threatening spam to get people to comply with your demands.
That is censorship in that you're forcing people to suppress themselves. That is exactly suppressing people from expressing themselves. If people cannot flag your content without fearing your endless gay porn spam, they then are suppressed effectively from expressing themselves because you will post gay porn spam on everything. Fear is used to force people to comply, it's unnerving, first you have to stretch the truth and call flagging/curating censorship even though it's not stopping you from expressing yourself, then you have to lie and call a threat self defense and try to justify it by saying you were forced. Nobody forces anyone to act a certain way because they curate content a certain way, it might encourage the person, but it certainly doesn't force them.
Steem is a wonderful community, but because shoulders will rub, noses will bump, the point is that the principle, the idea behind steem itself is Censorship Proof free speech. The principles of anarchy is what the heart of steem is about. It's the right to not be forced.
When drama queens make drama and vilify people, they erode the trust of the community, they raise doubt and that gives way to mistrusts, and mistrust doesn't equate to community.
When @skeptic cries censorship there is no more conversation to be had, there is no more sensibility, and reason goes out the window. When he plugs his rhetoric everywhere and resorts to threats and drama like "prove that it's not censorship" it doesn't bring about engagement or value, it's noise at best, at worst someone gets the impression that this place is a scam. There is nothing to resolve with "censorship, censorship everywhere, flagots, centralized whales control everything".
Point and fact is you and Craig-Grant. You clearly have no chance of getting through to him with your tactics, because first you attempt to vilify him, and what's the common ground then? When asshole over here, skeptic, goes and tries to find common ground, o wait, he doesn't fucking do sensible.
Spamming that stuff doesn't invite conversation, it doesn't work to resolve anything, it is there more or less to make noise.