You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: How Steem Protects Free Speech Without Promoting Hate Speech
It's impossible to have free speech if any type of speech is suppressed.
Hate speech for example. Anything can be deemed hate speech.
politics I don't agree with = hate speech
weather report I don't like = hate speech
unpleasant economic report = hate speech
public intimacy = hate speech
walking a dog in public = hate speech.
(all action is speech isn't it?)
This was the most intelligent comment I have read on the topic yet! Thank you I totally agree @everittdmickey
It really wasn't
Not having ability to discern hate speech inciting direct violence isn't intelligent at all, infact , quite the opposite.
Why can any type of speech, even things that aren't spoken or expressed with words such as "public intimacy" and "walking a dog", be deemed hate speech, and how?
Posted using Partiko Android
not only that , what he fails to mention when talking about depriving users of their income is that all that downvoted steem goes back to the steem rewards pool and users with enough SP can channel all that steem back to their accounts .
That is why they setup all those 'spam or badcontent' bot accounts . They take away from you and put in their own pocket .
Its all about money .....
https://www.fbi.gov/tips
It's not income if its still being voted on now is it? The hilarious corner of the mouth speaks about "teh bad whales". Because why not fling sneering remarks of exploitation and hypocrisy towards people who sacrifice their rewards to police abuse.
Posted using Partiko Android
potential for abuse is immense , and I trust you to police this platform as much as I trust anybody else . thanks but no thanks
Let me guess, you don't have anything to offer besides FUD?
Posted using Partiko Android
how is exposing fraud FUD ????
What fraud, how have you exposed anything, where is the proof amidst all these accusations? You know what FUD is? Fear: dismissing peoples effort at combating abuse and accusing them of combating abuse for ulterior motives. Uncertinty: That abuse cannot be combated. Doubt: That POS/DPOS is inherently flawed by your simplistic analogy.
Flinging accusations of Criminality and/or Fraud without anything to substantiate them: FUD
Posted using Partiko Android
for those who don't understand what I'm talking about, here is hypothetical example :
lets say there is only two users on steemit.com
1.) @andrarchy , he has 100.000 Steem Power
2.) @smidge-tv , he has 1 000.000 Steem Power
Steem Rewars Pool is lets say 100.000 STEEM
User @smidge-tv can claim '@andrarchy is spammer' and with only 10% of his power keep any potential @andrarchy's income at zero
Steem Rewards Pool stays intact and @smidge-tv uses the rest of his power to upvote his posts and keep entire 100.000 STEEM from rewards pool for himself .
These numbers are so ridiculous it makes the point moot. The reward pool is over $700,000. Flagging your 2 cent shit posts does not change my rewards in any noticeable way, yet I spent 2 cents I will not get back.
I know you are of a simple mind and delicate constitution, and likely never comprehend this, for that I am sorry.
this guy is the main suspect
https://www.fbi.gov/tips
The point being that POS/DPOS is flawed because more stake means more power? It's as if you confuse the benefit of DPOS with a shortcoming.
Posted using Partiko Android
POS/DPOS blah blah , either use simple language that everybody here can understand or stop covering for these criminals
So now you're accusing me of covering up for criminals because I used the most used acronym on this platform, while subsequently saying I'm deliberately using confusing terms and at the same time accusing people of being criminals, is that correct?
Posted using Partiko Android
bye
Yup, lose another argument and it's "bye" or "I'm calling the FBI on all of you", or "Investigation coming soon!".
Are you seriously that dense you can't see you are wrong.
Good riddance troll.
Posted using Partiko Android
Bingo
Any type of speech? What about threatening speech, speech vowing to harm others?
Why can anything be deemed Hate Speech?
Posted using Partiko Android
who's gonna decide?
If you say "hello" to me and I'm having a bad day and interpret that as a threat.
Izit?
Is' "Nice place you have here, shame if anything happens to it."
Is that a threat? How is it different?
Who decides.
Suppose I claim that you are speaking in code.
Hate speech encoded
who decides?
what about pep rallies?
'ra ra reej
kick em in the knee
ra ra rass
kick em in the other knee'
should they be banned
Of course, you cannot argue that threats are up to interpretation by saying that somehow someone could interpret an almost universal greeting as a threat.
If you don't have the sensibility to differentiate what constitutes a threat I'll offer you the explanation to develop such nuance: a threat is a "vow to cause harm or injury to others (including their property)"
You can claim whatever you want, the matter of fact is that you cannot demonstrate that beyond a reasonable doubt to convince a jury.
As for pep rallies, you ought to consider things before you express them, with common sense and sensibility, otherwise, why should anyone consider what you said as coherent or sensible (common sense)? Don't it seem as if you expect others to know the difference between whats a threat and what isn't and what's figurative and literal by the context its used in, such as a pep rally, unless you want others to deem you a threat to society and lock you up for good cause, or do you expect people who seemingly don't observe the difference between a threat and a greeting to freely walk around?
Posted using Partiko Android
You contest that anything can be deemed hate speech because "who decides" as if hate speech needs a well-defined list and stipulations of what is hate speech and when it isn't, handed down from some ultimate arbiter and that somehow people of all beliefs and creeds cannot come to a common understanding of such a simple concept.
So clearly, no, walking your dog isn't hate speech, neither is anything that doesn't directly fall into the definition above. Who decides is irrelevant at this point, what is wrong with the definition and why and how is all that matters, so do you have any contentions to the definition provided?
Posted using Partiko Android