Without accountability and clear parameters, quality content will be flagged and censored
As millions of users come to Steemit from other platforms, the flagging system will become a problem and users will down-vote disagreeable posts in mass. It may not be a huge problem now because most early-adopters are relatively knowledgeable about the platform and tend to see the potential and vision of Steemit. It's what attracted them to here in the first place.
In this post, I'm going to give you my views on:
- Why censorship-free content is important, especially if it's an unpopular opinion
- The flaws in the current flagging system and how it will lead to censorship of minority views
- What the flagging system needs
- My suggestions to revamp it
Why you should want freedom of expression
Freedom of speech is important, even if some speech is unpopular, hateful, or offensive. If you already understand these principles, feel free to skip this section. It's doubtful I could express my views as eloquently and succinctly as they do in this 2-3 minute video, so I encourage you to watch it:
Flaws in Steemit's flagging system: How it will lead to unwanted censorship and abuse
There are currently no automatic penalties for falsely-flagging posts. Millions of Redditors use the down-vote button for posts they disagree with or otherwise don't like. As they migrate over here, if things don't change, it's probable they will use flagging like a down-vote button.
Currently, the only penalty for unwarranted flagging is fear of retaliation. If a user falsely-flags your post, the only recourse you have is to flag them back in retaliation and/or recruit whales to do it for you, if you happen to have those connections. This "penalty" is entirely insufficient.
I should also mention there are other minor penalties for flagging (regardless of if it's warranted or not): It uses up voting power and you won't get curation awards for that post.
If people are using flagging like they use a down-vote button, minority opinions will likely get down-voted, even if it's quality content. Think of it like this: Suppose 95% of users passionately think one thing is right and only 5% of users think another thing is right. Someone with the 5% minority view is going to get down-voted into oblivion, even if they have an excellent argument and well-presented content. Without restrictions, people will flag it because they disagreed with the post. We can prevent this!
What the flagging system needs
- Clear Parameters
- Full Transparency
- Accountability
My suggestions to fix it
When a user clicks the flag button, have a box pop up saying something to the extent of Flagging a post is only for instances of (insert rules here). Unwarranted flagging can result in (insert penalties here). Enter reason for flagging in the box below.
Select trusted users would then be allowed to see who flagged the post, why they flagged the post, and click whether the flag was warranted or not.
- If only a low percentage of your flags are marked as "unwarranted", then no harm, no foul.
- If a higher percentage of your flags are "unwarranted" then your flagging privileges get suspended.
- If you have a highly-accurate flagging history, then you are granted the privileges to review other peoples' flags.
I would love to hear your thoughts! Please discuss other ideas/improvements you may have in the comments. Thanks for reading!
Jordan
