Everything that happens to us should be seen as positive — because we have the opportunity to learn and grow from it.
We have to first realize what the thing is that we have the opportunity to learn from in all situations. Once we figure that out, we can use the new knowledge to grow as a person.
I’m still trying to figure out how to be better at this myself.
The “ego” is the most difficult obstacle to overcome when encountering something that presents a challenge or simply when we encounter something that appears to be different than what we’re used to.
The “ego” is basically just how we internalize things — the way we perceive the world, and what our mind subconsciously sees, without trying to fully understand it, from more than just our own point of view.
does this apply to STEEMit?
Similar issues on Steemit can be attributed to the fact that it is a seemingly decentralized community (the “representative” STEEM blockchain is for another post). There are basically no rules because anything can be posted and upvoted and at the same time anything can be flagged or downvoted.
And then, since the attainment of reputation and SP is also unregulated, based on the parameters noted in the previous paragraph, whoever is at the top of the food chain is in control. So there is a bit of localized centralization in a decentralized (unregulated) environment.
If you’re a T-Rex, and I step into your territory you will most likely eat me, unless you’re non-canibalistic and I’m also a T-Rex. So as the saying goes: when in Rome... do as the Romans. Right?
Ok enough analogies.
What that essentially means is that if you’re posting about a certain topic, and behaving/posting in a certain way while doing it, and there is a pre-existing community related to that topic — you will be subject to the rules of the most powerful and/or the most popular in that community. The latter of the two, the popular, may be easier to be overcome (converted, if you will) than the more powerful (reputation/SP). Simply because you can rely more on your words than your power (since in this scenario we assume that it is lacking). And depending on how stubborn and ignorant that powerful user is, you may be able to convince a lot of no-ones who are more like you instead...
So if you don’t agree with the behavior or values that are creating a rule or structure in a certain community you can either try to gain power to attract and convert the plebeians or try to convince them through enlightenment. Or both. All the while trying to avoid direct conflict with a more powerful user and risk being flagged and a toll on your reputation.
Or
You could just not fight it. Because, sometimes you may be the one who is wrong and needs enlightenment. Refer to my opening statement.
communities 101
Then there is the most basic level of community, an individual’s blog, or post, or comment. If you are commenting on someone else’s post, they have every right to subjectively respond and react to your comment (whether you think they did it justly, ethnically, etc., or not). This is more geared toward the “spammers” of the platform. I put that word in quotes because my idea of spamming could be totally different than someone else’s. But it could also be an innocent non-malicious intent-ed user who just wants to voice their opinion.
I’ve recently encountered this, albeit in a slightly different and perhaps reciprocal scenario, after flagging someone’s post because it mentioned my username in a list of A LOT of other usernames. It wasn’t saying anything bad about those listed. And of course the reason for all these usernames being listed in that post eludes me now... but it’s safe to say that I didn’t agree with the “mention-spamming” regardless. The definition of which, I understand as: mentioning the user names of more than twenty (I’m being generous here) Steemians [for no “good” reason].
So... Was I quick to react in flagging something that perhaps I could have tried to understand better before reacting...? Yes. Would the possible outcome still have been the same? Yes. Will I try to be more: think at least nine times before emotionally-reflexively responding/reacting to something? Maybe. But I think you get the point if there even is one.
conclusion
Read this again from the beginning if you don’t get it. Ask me a question. Try to not understand it at first pass. Tell me what you think is the meaning. And then maybe we’ll both be speaking the same language, dialect, accent, etc.
This was inspired by conversations with various STEEMians and scenarios that I was both directly and indirectly involved in somehow.
thanks-giving challenge
My first thanks will be to the person that nominated me: 
(see here)
My second thanks will be to all of the users that continuously interact with me and thus support me.
My third thanks is to god, Thor, Zeus, Odin, and my parents for making me.
Ok so maybe that was four or more? I dunno but what I do know is that I make the rules here:
I nominate: everyone — to include things they are thankful for in their next seven posts and/or as an individual post. You’re supposed to nominate someone specifically in each post so I’ll try to do that in my next “thanks-giving” post. But first I’d like to see if anyone takes up the challenge on their own. Checking for balls and heart.