Fair enough. I think there's a fair bit of everyone talking past each other. Yeah, I can see your point about chasing upvotes on posts. I mostly post whatever I'm going to post without regard to votes, but I do enjoy making a popular comment and when I get lots of downvotes I do a quick check if I'm the asshole (sometimes yes, sometimes no). I can see where you'd want to disincentivize low quality shit-posting for upvotes. I'm pretty sure I'd shit-post anyway, though.

But consider: sometimes funny content chains of everyone joking around release tension and provide a way to engage with a post when I don't have anything of value to say. Engagement is what drives social media. Am I going to comment if I get no engagement? A vote at least says someone saw it and I'm not shouting into the void. And if no one votes or comments my post, how do I know anyone has seen it at all?

If this place were nothing but high quality serious content, I feel like it would be closer to Wikipedia than Reddit. Of course, you're free to disagree if you find none of this persuasive. I say all that because OP invited folks to explain why they disagreed. I'm not trying to come across as an argumentative prick, I just feel like folks are using words that clearly mean different things to different people. Like I don't think you and OP are thinking of the same thing. I'm not even sure OP was talking about the same thing at the end as he was in the beginning.

Being able to quantify reach and count likes or upvotes or good stats has been a feature of social media forever. Mastodon doesn't have or display upvotes, you just get notified when a post is favorited. It works there. But I engage way less there. But what soaks to me might not speak to someone else.

Anyway, that's all. Thanks for the response.