Hello, @practicalthought!

You abbreviated my second quote a bit, I said:

"As for myself, I'd rather pick the path of freedom as opposed to engaging in so-called blockchain environmentalism."

I come from a type of freedom-loving people who; just so long as your neighbor isn't violating the liberty of someone else, then you really ought not to nose into their affairs, or try and force them to act in a certain way. It's one thing to express yourself with words, but then it's another thing entirely when actions are taken to influence behavior. This is when things move beyond decorum and into the realm of hostility.

After the first condenser started, there was an unforeseen glitch in the matrix which was quickly discovered by STINC. They learned that abusive flagging will occur and that there is nothing they could do to stop it. For good or worse, that was the nature in the design of the strange new creation they made. After this discovery, they added for a flag reason 'reward disputes' as a catch-all to get everyone to shut up and stop bitching about abusive flagging. It was a clever way to "end the conversation," but it didn't quite solve the problem of abusive flagging.

With a post like this, I'm trying to communicate with Steemians on an individual level to let them know where the culture seems to be going, and allow them to realize they have a choice in how they behave. Just because someone gives you a hammer, and you're bored, or you think you can change the world, doesn't make everything a nail. IMO the expectations that some Steemians have for "saving the blockchain" might be on par with saving earth from global warming.

Just how much influence does hostile flagging have, and who's done the cost/benefit analysis on it. For example with global warming, even if we did destroy all industry (carbon output) in the name of saving a few degrees in temperature is it worth sacrificing the human race for?