Thanks for weighing in. I need to clarify a few things for you, as at times my presentation is made without much of my personality in it (detached if you would).

When I say controversial, I don't mean I necessarily hold the topic as controversial. It is an acknowledgement that others for whatever do. Many of the posts I have seen targeted seem to involve name calling (My circles are small here as I have always held myself to the amount of votes I have to give in thanks).

As for topics that others consider controversial would be topics such as:

• Vegan
• Vaccinations
• Acknowledgement of toxic feminism.
• Trump
• Flat earth
• White pride

The list could go on, but I think that is sufficient and many understand what those triggered by such topics hold in common. Those who target such conversations, in my opinion, are actually bolstering the ideas that triggered them to lash out. It displays an unwillingness to hold a relevant discussion on the pros and cons, and indicates to impartial third parties witness to such an act that one side of the spectrum feels their position is weak.

I also would interject that when people see a post greyed out, on top of the message I pointed out above, it also would pull people in out of curiosity as to why someone would try to sabotage the message in question. At this point, if the OP has presented their message in a coherent manner, it could elicit either agreement, or someone who holds an opposing position who is not afraid of presenting their idea of the facts. This latter type of possibility is gold in my opinion, as it gives more reference points to consider to those of us who are interested yet either undecided. Or better, see facts we were unaware of and understand we held ignorance on the matter that now demands further information. And lastly, maybe more unreasonable people weigh in and call names, further strengthening the OP regardless of whether they are correct or not, because they are meeting an onslaught of triggered assholes.

I also didn't mean to imply that all flags would meet the criteria most would hold as reasonable. Not only have I witnessed those, but have been the recipient myself for the crime of upvoting posts, interacting on posts and receiving support from others being targeted.

What I never did in those circumstances is get angry enough to forget that this is a stake system which by its very definition allows for this. I didn't post about the flags. One time I even thanked the powerful whale who let me know I was on their list, telling them there was no better endorsement than being on their list.

It comes down at the end of the day as to whether one feels strongly enough about their message and conduct. Comes down to whether this one social site is worthy of anger over a few crumbs of crypto. A person I consider my benefactor here was actually banned for some time from Steemit, many of his bots still are. Yet despite that ban, he never stopped supporting others here and still seeks whats best for the site. He stood up to many who were a lot more powerful than his considerable stake, and has never once posted a complaint post that I have seen. I consider this is due to his understanding what a stake system not just allows, but encourages.

In ending, I want to say none of this is to say a dick move isn't a dick move. But this system allows for dick moves, just as life itself does. In a perfect world there wouldn't be dick moves.