There's a Libertarian mindset (aka: Anarcho-Capitalist mindset) at the core of the membership of this social media that we are all going up against when we voice our concerns about such things such as plagiarism and ask for restrictions against plagiarists. The Libertarian "solution" to problems is to just let it work itself out over time. The market provides enough incentive without human interference in the form of "government", it is thought. That may be the case, but is sure as hell takes a lot longer for aberrant behavior to lose appeal when you just let "nature take its course", so to speak.
This is why I am not a dogmatic Libertarian and tend to lean more toward the Progressive side of things because Progressives recognize human nature for what it is and are also willing to use some sort of "force" to keep people in line, because not doing so increases the harm to other people that happens when unlawful people aren't being "controlled" by other people, and that's exactly what we are talking about when we are calling for freezing or removal of the account of a plagiarist. That's basically a police action, when you get right down to it, kind of like putting someone in jail so they can't continue to harm anybody. I for one prefer to use some force along the way to increase the integrity of the platform because that turns into real dollars and cents with regard to how many investors are going to be willing to invest in Steem which in turn affects the price of Steem and how much I'm going to get out of being here.
After all, does a society enforcing legitimate societal norms on people who don't just naturally do the right thing doing any more harm to society than the plagiarist who gets upvoted and a piece of the reward pool pie at the expense of everyone else? A plagiarist getting some SP that should be going to you and the rest of us might not be taking it by force, while freezing his account would be force, but so what? One is a legitimate action, the other isn't.