Nope, just their application to others.
RE: Perhaps anarchy already exists and "THE COMMUNITY" is merely the highest manifestation of organized crime.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Perhaps anarchy already exists and "THE COMMUNITY" is merely the highest manifestation of organized crime.
Please explain.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Aren't you wanting to find rules to judge others' behavior without fear of being wrong in your evaluation?
We don't get to decide right and wrong for others, only ourselves.
Our ability to judge right from wrong is often questionable enough when we do it for ourselves, but to apply our perspective to another's is begging to introduce error, imo.
Some people are supposed to be serial killers, and others destined to be their victims.
Do you propose you know which is which?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Not exactly.
Each individual is only "answerable" to their own personal moral framework. There is no "god" and "the government" has absolutely ZERO "moral authority". "the group" or "collective" or "community" ALWAYS expects the individual to be sacrificed on the alter of "the greater good", so "they" also have no "moral authority" (they're simply selfish, reflexively self-protecting, not "moral" or "immoral", just like any other animal/organism/organization).
What I'm trying to investigate are individual moral frameworks.
I'm not trying to "tell anyone" what their moral framework "should be", I'm asking them to describe their "moral ideology" and simply pointing out where their descriptions of their own personal moral framework are LOGICALLY INCOHERENT.
Now, if someone simply admits "I do whatever I flipping feel like, whenever I flipping feel like it", well then, 100 points for HONESTY.
But then if that exact same person starts railing against "spammers" and "trolls" and "low-quality-content" and "the immorality of a coercive government which derives its power from threats of violence", I'm going to point out their OBVIOUS INCONSISTENCY/HYPOCRISY/INCOHERENCE.
ETHICAL EGOISM,
Click to watch 15 minutes,
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Yawns, stretches, says, 'This is why i dont watch movies. They put me to sleep and i always get distracted by the flashy colors.'
So, i shouldnt flag people devaluing my stake?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It depends on how you define "community property".
And it depends on how you define "proper enforcement mechanisms".
It sounds like you consider "bad actors" to be "free-riders" ("devaluing" "your" "stake").
When I asked you earlier about "community property" and solving the "free-rider" problem, you just glossed over it completely, suggesting that either there is no "free-rider" problem, or "the local community" would "do something" non-specific to "solve" it on a case-by-case-basis.
It seems strange that you would consider it "your" "stake".
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
OK, steem and real life are different animals.
IRL, free loaders are being carried now with the added drain of the govt workers needed to herd them.
On steem, low effort posts counterfeit steem.
It devalues all the other steem.
I put in the labor to get it, how is it not my stake?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I strongly disagree. The principles of "community property" apply, regardless of how "hypothetical" or "practical" the application may be.
Imagine a city in the desert.
The city has a central well. Actually, it's a cistern.
The cistern is refilled once a week.
Citizens who invest in "cistern-corp" get a daily share of water proportional to their investment, the more you invest, the larger your daily share.
Citizens can give this daily share to others, or to themselves.
Citizens CAN be bribed and or bullied into giving their daily share to specific individuals.
Citizens can create posts on which to hang collection buckets.
The posts with the fullest buckets grow taller and are therefore visible to more citizens, attracting more attention and receive more contributions.
At the end of the seven day cistern cycle, any water that has not been distributed, or that has fallen through the grid-floor (below minimum contributions) gets dolled out to the tallest posts, with the tallest post getting the largest cut of the "leftover-pie" and any post with less than 20 droplets gets no additional cut of the "leftover-pie".
This system is fair because it gives the most to the (good-smart) rich and nothing to the (evil-dumb) poor.
This system is fair because instead of giving everyone a boost proportional to their investment, it gives MORE to the rich and STEALS from the poor.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Yes, valuing players who follow the rules.
Those that accept the status quo are rewarded more.
All rules(laws) favor the rich, or the rich change them.
When the rich(haves) is(are) eating from the work of the poor(havenots), what defense to all out enslavement does the poor have?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit