Lemmy just reached a new milestone: 1 million posts, across 1,323 servers.
this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2023
6165 points (99.5% liked)
Fediverse
28490 readers
591 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
My philosophy on downvotes:
If I don't agree with someone here, I upvote anyway. Not because I'm a Pollyanna, but because I'm happy they're here and supporting Lemmy by posting and commenting. I really want Lemmy to stay up and stable for a long time and provide what Reddit used to provide for the wider community. Reddit still does, but hopefully we can too. I'm talking about political and health issues.
If it's a mean comment, I do nothing and move on.
If something is just messed up, that's a message for the mods. I've messaged once so far. Someone posted information about a person (image and real-life contact info) and said they were performing cosmetic surgery on puppies. The image was of the person flipping the bird, so it was clearly made as a hit piece. Mods got rid of it within a day.
For me while scrolling through a threat I upvote those that I agree with and leave alone those that I disagree, unless it's done in an asshole kind of way which I kind of despise.
But if I make a post I do tend to upvote everyone which I kind of justify as "rewarding" people for interacting with me.
I follow a similar philosophy, except I do downvote the mean but not rule breaking content. While it's not bad enough to justify removal, I do still want to discourage people being mean on this platform. For most disagreeable opinions, I'll either move on or reply with my point of view.
As Reddit has proven, this is not how the masses use downvotes. I have seen unpopular, but harmless opinions be downvoted.
I have seen people getting downvoted heavily by saying they don't like x game. That creates echo chambers.
Yeah the issue is that the upvote/downvote binary is used for more than just (good contribution)/(bad contribution).
Back when Reddit was small enough to have community values, reddiquette was taken semi-seriously. But with the push for more users over the past 5-7 years, that’s all gone out the window.
I’ve thought a bit about how that issue could be fixed in a way that still allows content to be rated by usefulness democratically, and I’m pretty convinced that for that to happen, there would need to be an upvote/downvote and an agree/disagree.
Order content by vote delta, but display the agree/disagree counts on the content.
Would be interesting to be able to see content that makes good arguments but that is largely disagreed with instead of having that content disappear at the bottom of the page.
various reaction choices seems to be a better communicator.. like on linkedin. i'd rather flag something as interesting or funny or ugh..
Yeah, and that would give people an outlet for when they want to express how they feel about some content without having to muddy the default prioritize/deprioritize-based sorting.
Different people see the meaning of downvote in a different way. I don't always use it negatively. I think of it now as voting in general terms. Sometimes I do use it because I strongly dislike the comment. I guess maybe we need 2 different downvote options lol
Like two different car horns.
One for, "Hey, I'm over here. Don't hit me." And one for, "HEY, I'M OVER HERE! DON'T HIT ME!"