Comment on Upvotes and downvotes are public information on Lemmy
socsa@piefed.social 6 days agoPublic votes do absolutely nothing to stop people from making a bunch of users on a bunch of instances and voting from those users. Voting agents are a simple solution to the issue, since you can still just ban the voting agent if it seems problematic.
But there's a deeper context here, which is we are drawing a weird line between voting being a fundamental, if not critical part of the application, but also apparently grounds for imposing sanctions on users for doing it wrong? That's a fundamentally flawed mechanic no matter how you swing it, since you can't standardize any singular set of rules, and we are already seeing a rapid escalation of tit for tat vote bans. This is just unsustainable and is pushing things towards an obvious endpoint where there is such a chilling effect on voting that it negates the entire utility of the mechanic for sorting and content curation.
anarchiddy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 days ago
This is just further evidence that we just shouldn’t have a downvote option at all.
npdean@lemmy.today 6 days ago
No, downvotes are more important than upvotes
anarchiddy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 days ago
I legitimately don’t even know why someone might think this.
npdean@lemmy.today 4 days ago
Disagreements are more important than agreements, otherwise it just forms echo chambers
socsa@piefed.social 6 days ago
I agree, except we should leave the basic mechanic and just make it a placebo.
anarchiddy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 days ago
Why? I don’t see a benefit to the button at all. Even being able to register disapproval is better done via comment, anyway, and having to articulate it makes you far more likely to self-reflect and temper yourself than if you can just downvote every comment in a thread