112
We Need Downvotes on Lemmy.one
(lemmy.one)
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
112 points (100.0% liked)
Chat
1545 readers
1 users here now
A relaxed section for uncategorized discussion. Post a question, share some advice, let us know how your week is going, etc.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I think something that isn't considered is that people aren't always going to be happy with you and the ability to downvote is an outlet, not being able to give a downvote could increase the likelihood that the person responds with their disagreement in a way that results in more negative comments.
And if they're disagreeing in a respectable or kind way, then that's good! It encourages discussion and debate, instead of simply clicking downvote and leaving the poster no way to know why you disagree at all.
If they're being rude or inflammatory, then that's breaking the rules anyway, so instead of being downvoted, it should be reported.
What's wrong with disagreement? Personally, I'd rather see words that add context rather than an anonymous downvote that could mean anything.
Commenting merely boosts activity on a post.. Exact opposite of what you'd want.
Why is that the exact opposite of what you want?
If there's something objectionable in a rule breaking way, report. Otherwise, this seems like you literally just don't want to have discussions, which is certainly your prerogative but then what exactly are you getting out of this?
Here's an excellent example.. Nothing against the rules in the comment, but it's off-topic and, frankly, insane. It should get pushed towards the negative and hidden. https://kbin.social/m/worldnews/t/53687/-/comment/229302
I get you, altho that I'd just report.
If we took a less spammy/insane thing for example though, like just a low quality post, I understand that. Not objectionable enough to report, and no utility in responding because it's just noise and you'd just increase the noise. And there is utility in getting rid of it (or at least deemphasizing it) because it gives space to actual discussions.
I think that's a reasonable use case for downvotes. It's definitely not the only way they are used (e.g. disagree button), but valid anyway. There are other mechanisms to sort this way too (e.g. number of likes + age of comment, so old comments with no/few likes sink - new junk still sits at the surface for a bit tho, possibly longer than if downvotes could drop em). But worth more thought for sure.
This, tbh.
If you see something racist or objectionable or maybe it just hurts your fee-fees because the post pointed out you take life advice from your imaginary friend in the sky.... doesn't matter. Sometimes you don't want to give the effort of a response
It'd be as stupid as taking away the 'upvote' button, as well, and then saying "well content will promote based on activity! If it wasn't worth a comment or response, why are you bitching about it in the first place?"
I can see how this would relate to Facebook's like functionality - but without a karma system and with a completely different set of users, I don't think the impact is the same.
The answer, then, is moderators, not institutional passive-aggression.