Well the previous steem post about the content on witnesses servers/nodes brings to attention the argument of liability. Where is it placed? On the server/node side or the end user/ content creator. I understand we view ourselves as independent freelancers each representing hive albeit ill argue those with larger stake and millions of witness votes hold greater ownership and voice in terms of representing hive but I would like to see measures taken like a community lawyer to best navigate possible future scenarios where a witness is under pressure from a government for content distributed or individual. It certainly seems that there could be justification for numerous companies to self censoring if there is legal precedent for these matters.

Without clear legal precedents in place for the emerging fintech incarnations like Hive content creation and ownership, Hivewatchers would just be a police force that is unregulated enforcing rules that are not apart of signing up.
(if im wrong please direct me to these rules as there are guidelines but is there a terms of service that can get your account deleted?)
Wouldn't low quality content or plagiarized content be delt with easily as a community and not the need of a loosely centralized police force of large stake holders to enforce rules? Maybe its the ptsd in me from my past experience with steemwatchers and the recent public stance they took in the deep dive community that causes me to question hivewatchers or am I starting to highlight the main weakness of hive currently which is the lack of diversity with larger stake holders to assume that the community or communities as a whole can regulate the content accordingly.