It's interesting watching you and Baah debate this, as when you first came on my radar I had suspected you both are the same person. Still not completely ruled out, as a master debater (which both of you clearly are) is capable of arguing positions they do not hold personally. Having said that, I see both sides of this issue. Several I have enjoyed here have been targets, I myself have been downvoted for not only interacting with some who are but resteeming them. I never allowed that to stop my support of the person being targeted.

I agree that at times this targeting is a dick move, made because at the end of the day might makes right. In life, and here in an environment that the law is stake based. One of the ones most often complained about here for doing this (Bernie) has said more than once, if you don't like it buy Steem and power it up to protect yourself. Obviously for many here that isn't feasible, yet that isn't the systems fault but those of us who don't have the means. We come into this system (Stake based) knowing that those with more stake have more power and by the same token at any time can choose to walk away and not honor such a system.

I am curious on your thoughts on a thought that keeps gnawing at me. I have watched platforms censoring/de-platforming for some time now. I see many who I agree with being targeted by this, many of these people having many followers and perhaps a good amount of wealth to various degrees. So my question is this.

If platforms (including Steemit) in unpalatable due to (dick moves by those in power or outright censorship) why aren't moves being made by those affected to create their own platforms where they can decide the rules. Baah points out a lot that Steemit is not Steem. The claim (as I understand it) is the chain is censorship proof (I know, most of us do not have the knowledge to access the chain without the front ends such as Steemit). The front ends are privately owned, and can allow how they wish. With the upcoming SMT, it seems like one of means (or a group with means such as the Freezepeach group could utilize the benefits of this chain using their own tokens, their own rules to allow the types of speech that is felt is being censored/hidden here. Why isn't this solution reached for by the many who agree with the premise many are being censored here?

I've written on this in the past. Here is one of my last posts on it several months ago, if you're interested.

https://steemit.com/steem/@practicalthought/trying-to-force-the-square-peg-in-the-round-hole