Proposing a Constructive and Educational Renaming of 'Flagging/Downvoting'!

View this thread on: d.buzz | hive.blog | peakd.com | ecency.com
·@kurtbeil·
0.000 HBD
Proposing a Constructive and Educational Renaming of 'Flagging/Downvoting'!
# Time to Destroy the STEEMIT Nobility! 

<center>https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/36/97/7c/36977c7fa54e614406725692ffcdc987.jpg</center>

###  Inspired by @riskdebonair's .. <a href="https://steemit.com/flagthetrendingpage/@riskdebonair/a-trenders-flag-guild">A Trenders Flag Guild?</a>

# If there is no other way to end collusion ..

Then we must act against unjustified rewards, with the tools we have!  This should be quite separate from attacking a user for misbehaving - plagiarism, tag abuse .. and whatever else I do not care about. :)  I stand by my suggestion that "Downvotes / Flagging" which has a negative impact on another users reputation and visibility should cost the downvoter - not the first time this has been mentioned, but perhaps a slightly different spin, detailed here .. https://steemit.com/steemit/@kurtbeil/upvotes-benefit-the-upvoter-downvotes-should-cost

However, as @riskdebonair has pointed out, very clearly, there are posts that are receiving a difficult to justify share of the rewards pool, and the posters enjoy this on a regular basis .. ie. every f***ing time they post! :)  We should be able to act against the reward of the post, without attacking the person's reputation, or the visibility of the post - which is highly-subjective censorship.

If the ability to reduce rewards is indeed a necessary and positive aspect of STEEMonomics,  then we must be able to act in this manner, without making it personal.  Users need to be educated as to the benefit, and the action must be named in a way that does not create a negative reaction in the mind of the affected, the posters whose rewards are being reduced.  I believe this type of "downvote" should be called something else ..

- Depreciate?
- Equalize?
- Rebalance?
- Replenish?
- Return to Pool? derrrr

# Limited Use?

This obviously can be abused, so 'if it is technically possible', perhaps limiting the ability to perform this action, over a period of time, or make such flagging independent of stake - make it equally weighted, based on the amount of reward and time left to the end of the curation period?

 # 3 Types of Flags!!!???

 1) Warning (no effect)

 2) Flagging (impact to reputation and the visibility of posts - effect is relative to stake, however this one will cost you!  the steem or sbd spent would be burned .. if again, that really is a benefit to the economy - not an expert! :)).

 3) Downvote (Return Rewards to the Pool - no impact to reputation or visibility of the post, simply voicing ones opinion that the post is not worth what it has made - 1 user 1 equally weighted deprecation).

# Sound good? .. OR .. http://static.fjcdn.com/gifs/Blow+it+out+your+ass+read+description+i+work+at_4abcc5_5189550.gif

<br>
​<div class="pull-right">**Thanks for taking time to give me a read!**<br>- @kurtbeil</div>
<br><br>
<center><img src="https://i.imgur.com/JAhX2nE.jpg"></center>
👍 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,