Dude you tagged @hobo.media, of course it caused my notice... Duh. You rubbed the genie lamp.
As for the "vagueness" claims. Actually, I have not been silent, you and I spoke a lot on this subject and it got tiresome. My "silence" is really a result of me giving up in being able to have a respectful conversation with you. Marky and I disagree on this topic, but we're able to do it respectfully and walk away from the conversation without disdain for other. Your debating style reminds me of me when I was 18 before reading the book How to Win Friends & Influence People, and there was a reason I had had that book put in my face back then.
As for my agreement to the guy's statement. Look, all you have to do is reading a dictionary and it will point out that the downvote feature is censorship:
Censorship, the changing or the suppression or prohibition of speech or writing that is deemed subversive of the common good. It occurs in all manifestations of authority to some degree, but in modern times it has been of special importance in its relation to government and the rule of law.
Source: https://www.britannica.com/topic/censorship
Your argument is that the downvote does not prohibit nor change the language. It does change the message as images can be outright removed "due to low rating" as it says. However, it does in fact suppress the speech of the downvoted individual as well.
Dictionary definition of suppress:
There are a few definitions I found particularly suitable for this topic:
- "to restrain from a usual course or action"
(content is now shaded and made less visible than all the rest) - to inhibit the growth or development of
(you want it to lose the rewards it would have received by voters other than you and lessen its ability to be seen and discussed) - to keep from giving vent to
- to keep from public knowledge
(why would it go shaded and condense if not to make it difficult for people to see?)
Source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/suppress
You are also completely ignoring why people are fleeing Youtube for Bitchute and Patreon for Bitbacker and cryptocurrency donations. Youtube is not prohibiting content, but making it more difficult to find with its new algorithms, and also demonetizing them. Patreon is commonly spoken about as a platform that demonetizes content it dislikes and the wide audience of these content producers refer to this as financial cenorship.
Lastly, the evidence is in the behavior of flagging communities and bots that reveal the truth of their authoritative mentalities. The Abusereport bot literally explains that it will flag anyone the bot creator deems a "trash" person. This shows that its creator is a controlling authoritarian with the same attitude of the Twitter administration with its subjective judicial system. Worse, the creator of the bot is imposing on Steem the same concept utilized by cults that employ shunning and the shunning of those that do not shun marked people in order to control access to a variety of viewpoints.
The reality of the downvote feature is that it exists due to authoritarians that are not satisfied with having a vote for what they like, they need more, control over the voices, thoughts and votes of others. Elections do not require downvotes, a vote for one thing satisfies as a vote against all other options. Downvotes are simply unnecessary.
this is worthy of a post in itself
Alright dude, we're never going to agree and I can't see how there is any value in this conversation going on further. So, good luck with everything.