47
What happens to downvotes when instances have different policies?
(self.nostupidquestions)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 Jun 2023
47 points (92.7% liked)
No Stupid Questions
35870 readers
1110 users here now
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I disagree. Downvotes rarely add anything of value to the discussion that can't be expressed simply by not upvoting. There's no nuance to a downvote, and they're so often misused to the extent that I'm glad not to have to worry about them.
Downvotes have a very important function. They are meant to suppress irrelevant discussion, trolls, and hate.
The problem is people on reddit stopped following reddiquette many years ago, and they became dis/agree buttons.
But if there is an off-topic post and there's no downvotes possible, that irrelevant content cannot be properly suppressed by downvotes, and is more likely to rise.
This causes the boundaries/purpose of a specific community to become muddied. I can't tell you haw many subreddits I saw devolve into nothing but shitposting memes. Not having downvotes just makes that problem much worse.
Downvotes are important for the site to function properly. Even right here, idiots are downvoting you simply because you have a dissenting opinion. It is not a disagreement button. I upvoted your comment even tho I wholeheartedly disagree, because you are contributing healthy discourse.
And for the people in instances like yours who I see saying how refreshing it is to be able to comment without fear of downvotes, you're being too sensitive... It's imaginary internet points. That should never be the basis for your self-worth and self-confidence. That's only going to make your shell even more fragile. Hypersensitivity isn't healthy. It's okay to disagree with each other.
Respectfully, I am aware of the intended function. My point is nothing to do with the intended function, it's to do with how downvotes are misused in practice. I already knew that people would misuse the downvote function simply because I disagree with the majority opinion.
Fortunately, it's not a binary choice. There is a place for people on the fediverse who like to have downvotes. There is also a place for people who do not. :)
And that is a beautiful thing!
I respectfully disagree. Downvotes add a way of gauging the percent of people who support/don't support a comment. Let's say I'm asking for advice about which product to buy. With an upvotes-only system the upvote count is biased towards the earliest comment, whereas with an up/down vote system, the ratio helps you detect comments with heavy bias or blatantly wrong facts. So an upvote/downvote system makes it easier to tell the credibility of a comment, basically allowing you to indirectly gauge the opinion of the community rather than the one person who commented.
I see your points, and they do make sense, but I respectfully disagree with your conclusion. My reasoning is that, from my experience, a downvote has no nuance. A reply saying "this is wrong and here's why" with a hundred upvotes is useful. A downvote is basically the equivalent of flicking a peanut.
does a comment/post really need hundreds of comments saying similar things it also helps to hide spam content and trolls
No, why would you think that?
You remove the downvotes you juat get people more people in the comments with "you're an idiot" or whatever instead of just a downvote.
It's not like those kinds of comments are really that nuanced or helpfull either.
I haven't noticed that so far.
Also, even if that were an issue, please forgive me but I'm not entirely convinced that the problem of people posting comments that are lacking in nuance could be solved with a tool that has no nuance.
The thing is that people usually won't take the time to write that reply and in case of trolls, they shouldn't be wasting their time.
YouTube's dislikes used to be great for telling useful content apart from useless spam at a glance without even clicking on it. They removed them, so now we have to read the comments before watching a video if we want to avoid wasting time.
In this day and age, information flows so fast there isn't always time for nuance. The downvote isn't perfect and misused often, but it does serve a purpose.
I have a counter example where downvotes are very useful. In r/askphysics we would downvote any comment that had errors or was completely wrong. A post didnt have to be around long before it became clear what the consensus answer was. This was much more helpful to the asker than just showing them a bunch of answers, and responses to those answers, and leaving them to discern who is most credible.
In that case, just not voting wouldn't help. And if you have downvoting, you can still just not vote when that's more appropriate. That's what I do for opinions I simply disagree with.
I won't argue because I'm still bewitched by that icon.