When the failed idea of democracy takes root, money flees so as not to allow the masses of poor strip their often hard earned wealth from them by consensus.
the fact one can self upvote is the same in essence as there being no option to self upvote
To any pondering this logically, those tow positions are glaringly diametrically opposed. Telling another what they can or can't do with their property is limiting their speech regardless of how you wish it weren't so.
It simply still gives everyone on the site the same / equal rights as one another.
blurt
We already have equal rights. What you propose is equal outcome which is a crime against nature and will once again see a withdrawal of those tasked with fulfilling others poorness until we all have equality in being poor. No logical person of wealth will agree to such a lopsided demand.
We all come here with an equal chance to deposit funds into our wallet, an equal chance to grow followers and grow our wallets.
It's not realistic to think we all start out of the gate equally. We weren't equal when we got here. An example of this would be this.
It would be ludicrous for me to think myself and Ctime were equal in our start here. He came with a much larger wallet than myself. We were not equal in our choices in life leading up to our arrival here. He is entitled to the rewards of his start here, as are we all. He owes me nothing because he got a better start than I did.
Equality in outcome is an emotional outlook that isn't grounded in reality and actually tears asunder any foundations those with more to contribute have built.
Communism other than on a voluntary bases destroys all in its path as those who create throw their hands up in the air and go home with their ball.
I would urge you to listen to this brilliant podcast from famigliacurione.
https://blurt.blog/blurt/@famigliacurione/the-blurtopian-experience-big-wallet-big-head
I don’t see it like that at all. Blurt already is a platform that has changed certain features since it’s brginning. Even in the beginning it mirrored the site but took away the downvote... essentially changing the platform to work more in alignment with what users wanted... no downvote button. If the majority of users also wanted no stake to be delegated to people with more stake that would essentially be the same.. tweaking the site to adapt to user preference. I’m not even saying what I would prefer but that I don’t believe the rules on a site make something discriminatory as long as they are applied across the board to everyone. I mean blurt alrwady has rules. It says one can’t plagerise etc. People know if they use blurt that’s a site rule, it doesn’t just discriminate individual people for their actions.
This decision was made before there were users, and it was done out of respect for property rights.
I know this much. If there comes a time where Blurt begins restricting or disrespecting property rights, I'll be leaving. That was the draw that made me decide to do this one more time. If that draw disappears, I will as well just as I did at Steem and Hive. I left Hive believing I was done with all of this, and was waiting with all of my Hive powered down in case the market went back up when I found out about Blurt. It took me much research to understand I would give this one more try.
You mention plagiarism, and that is different. That is a crime in most countries due to it not respecting property rights. I don't advocate for property rights theft, and it's perfectly understandable that in order to shield themselves from being participants in a crime the front ends disallow the action on their sites.