So you’re doing something you personally believe is unethical and your argument is that we should also follow your belief that it is unethical, while we continue to do it? If you genuinely feel it’s unethical, why are you even doing it? Just stop lol
I mean you’re assuming this isn’t happening more in reverse to platform disinformation: take a look at any trans related thread in a UK sub and you’ll see the most useless leap of faith transphobe comments receive 5 gold while the more scientific pro trans comments are buried far, far down the chain.
Also, equating gilding with democracy is odd - we live in a world where economic inequality is growing. Who can afford the most gold? It’s not the poor/disabled/other minorities who have important views that need to be heard - they can’t afford to give 5 gold to random reddit comments they agree with because they’re statistically earning less.
Buying gold is not democratic. There’s a reason you can’t just (directly) buy votes in elections. This is still a shitty move on Reddit’s part, but for a different reason than hurting democracy.
@db0 / @sunbrothersco does this fall under the low quality post rule? I’m asking this because I don’t want to see !piracy becoming just as bad as r/piracy was, if it is going to increasingly be memes I’d rather find another piracy discussion place in the fediverse
One can even argue that the tools needed to avoid IP are already here: crowdfunding models, commissions, and Patreon-esque income, and likely in the near future, universal basic income - you can consider the government/taxes subsidising your ability to create art if you’re starting from zero skills/connections/reach or from scratch with a specific project. With these, why does the author even retain total IP? Their project is funded by the community, so it’d make sense that the creator and the community had a more symbiotic relationship rather than the parasitic one where the author is effectively a digital landlord and dictator with complete control over the project.