A founder having the HUGE voting power @ned has should not be flagging because they think all the other voters over-valued a post. That's a dictatorship, not a decentralized system where every user's vote counts. I agree if it was a whale not associated with the founders it is a natural occurrence. When a founding team member does this though, it's a dictatorship, plain and simple.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
So lets say dan and ned and any of their employees stop voting. You think it would be decentralised then? The budget stays the same so in fact if they stopped voting the power would just move down to the next in line. Which would mean blocktrades (according to steemwhales) would become the new dictator. Because his vote would now be the most powerful. (That is, if this were a dictatorship as you call it)
My concern isn't with anything other than a whale founding member's account not voting "with" the majority of the community on average (per-user voted upon...in this case @masteryoda). The HUNDREDS of upvotes @masteryoda received from the community were continually wiped out per-post by ONE founding member whale. That is centralization because they founded the system. I actually am fine with a non-founder whale doing whatever they want, but it makes me concerned when a founding member wipes out hundreds of community member's votes with one click more than once on the same community member.