Sounds great. I've been wondering who the hell is voting for that MartinTimothyesque bullshit.

However, Froglich hates that idea.

Edit: I have changed my mind. Does anyone know what the Reddit rationale was being leaving vote counts anonymous. I'd be concerned about a future big brother crackdown where voting info could be used as evidence against someone.

Here's some historical situations that may be similar in nature to a future event.

• Red scare McCarthy-era. People were targeted as anarchist, or socialist, or people who might vote for "socialist proposals"
• The 9/11 Muslim hysteria where thousands of Muslims were rounded up and jailed for as many as 6 months without probable cause, or any evidence
• There was a hunt for anonymous a while back, so dissident programmer types may draw additional scrutiny.
  

The last 2 were within the past two decades in the US, so that's not ancient history. Who knows what other events occurred in other countries.

Up-votes may actually be more risky than actual comments. My guess is that up-votes would be manipulated as metadata. Prosecutors can create broad assumptions about intent, and there's no way to easily clarify that intent, or refute it. They'll use one-sided gotcha questions like, "have you quit beating your wife yet, yes or no?". That can catch people off guard and sunk their defense.

I'm going to have to agree with OldManCorley on this one. There are unforseen risks that could easily outweigh the short-term benefits.

Intentional sabotage cannot be ignored forever. Certain agent provacatuers do need to be addressed. Other groups have already taken the lead on this, and dealt accordingly.

One idea I had was to create one of those bots that chime in with "and my axe", etc. A custom version could be created to haunt the posts of certain repeat offenders.

Something like:

"Free speech is not a core value, when it is apples solely to statements that an individual approves. Free speech is a value when it is defended for those who use their voice to make statements that that one despises. Saidit supports free speech in all forms.

Unfortunately, certain groups or individuals have been posting comments that we cannot find any factual evidence to support. Attempts have been made to contact these individuals, but without success.

These voices have not been silenced in the interest of our commitment to free speech as a value. Saidit does not condone or endorse messages or the message history of {agent provacatuer XYZIJK}.

Please use your own critical judgment when considering messages from XYZIJK; AND MY AXE!!!.

-There I SaidIt!

Just a thought. What does the group think?

One last point of consideration. Dissent voices should be carful considered.
Good call OldManCorley. You changed my mind.

Hey Froglich. You suck.

Edit 2:. I didn't read the updated comment before the previous edit. I agree with major that ignoring bullshit is the best way to deal with most commenting issues. Organizational sabotage is an entirely different issue.

Also, if implemented, can we call the 'my axe' response "the moat/sewer of debate" or "sewer of the pyramid" or "sewer of disgrace". Free speech Bot, or "free speech defender", or sumpting.