10
submitted 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by YIj54yALOJxEsY20eU@lemm.ee to c/unpopularopinion@lemmy.world

Downvotes suck. I get it, they are made up internet points coming from strangers (or bots) that you know nothing about, and you shouldn't let that get you down. Still, putting in a few minutes of effort to share your opinion and engage with the community just to see a downvote is disheartening.

Based on the patterns of downvotes I see on a post, it seems like there is usually one or two people downvoting everything they wouldn't personally say themselves. Extrapolating from this, I presume there is a population of users that contribute more downvotes than anything.

Personally, I don't think the platform should allow any user to spend more time tearing things down than building other things up. Only allowing downvotes after so many upvotes would help stop trolls and could help generate more engagement via upvotes.

Edit:

The upvote/downvote count would be a global count including posts and comments, not a post specific count. This solution does not prevent downvoting, it merely adds friction to those who predominantly leave negative feedback by ensuring their positive feedback elsewhere. Sure, some would go on to upvote unsavory things, but others would attempt to further engage with their interests, and some would simply lurk.

If any good faith user approached the limitation, they would likely be better served by curating their feed.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 11 points 6 months ago

Putting your finger on the upvote/downvote scale in any way amounts to censoring the community's collective voice. If the intention is to create an open, impartial forum for discussion and community interaction, then no such action should be taken.

Enforcing a "positive" trend in voting might create the façade of a seemingly friendlier community, but not a genuinely friendlier one. It might also create toxic positivity.

[-] YIj54yALOJxEsY20eU@lemm.ee -4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Do you think users that contribute downvotes more than anything add to the community interaction and help create open discussions? I personally think they inhibit that and discourage others from sharing. This is a limit that practically should not be reached by any good faith users, so I do not anticipate a net negative effect.

[-] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Do you think users that contribute downvotes more than anything add to the community interaction and help create open discussions? I personally think they inhibit that and discourage others from sharing.

It really doesn't matter what I think, or what you think, about such users, because any such opinion could only be a generalization, and therefore not a good basis for making policy decisions.

I do not anticipate a net negative effect.

I don't think you're putting enough thought into unintended consequences. Censorship is sometimes necessary (the classic example of yelling "fire!" in a theater) but always problematic. It should never be implemented in blanket policies but only in specific cases to drive specific outcomes (not to create a generally more positive atmosphere) - hence moderation and reporting.

If you were to implement a policy like this, what you are doing is saying to the entire community, "I don't trust you to express your opinions without guardrails, and so I am putting this filter on you to adjust them." It's a very parental idea, it seems motivated by a desire to control the conversation on a broad scale.

[-] Spendrill@lemm.ee 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

It’s a very parental idea, it seems motivated by a desire to control the conversation on a broad scale.

There's a lot of children, of all ages, on the internet.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2024
10 points (54.6% liked)

Unpopular Opinion

6216 readers
56 users here now

Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!


How voting works:

Vote the opposite of the norm.


If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.



Guidelines:

Tag your post, if possible (not required)


  • If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
  • If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].


Rules:

1. NO POLITICS


Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.


2. Be civil.


Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...


Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.


5. No trolling.


This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.



Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS