• Armok: God of Blood
    link
    fedilink
    English
    111 year ago

    I agree with most of this, although I think that downvotes are an important part of platforms like these. They allow shit takes to get their visibility reduced.

    • @pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -61 year ago

      That’s the whole problem. No one’s posts should be affected by the opinions of others and the fact that they are incentivizes all of the problems we are facing. People are making alts, brigadeering and building botnets to get around being downvoted and that breaks the system.

      Downvotes are not legitimate in any way at all except that they make people feel better and we can’t build a future based on such auspices.

      • Armok: God of Blood
        link
        fedilink
        English
        71 year ago

        The main issue is this:

        Say 1,000 people are arguing over an issue with 10 different sides, on a platform where you can upvote as many comments as you want. 250 people agree with one side, and the other nine sides have no more than 150 people in agreement. In this case, the comment arguing this side would have 250 points.

        Now, in a system without downvotes, this would rise to the top. However, say all 750 other people disagree with the side and can downvote it. In this case it would have -500 points. Let’s also say that the 250 people in agreement with this point also downvote all the other comments that disagree with them (in true Reddit fashion). The second most popular opinion would be sitting at -100 points. Basically, downvotes allow massively unpopular opinions to be shoved to the bottom.

        Bots and brigading are significant problems that need attention on platforms such as these, but removing downvotes isn’t the answer.

        • @pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          01 year ago

          That presumes downvotes represent honest disagreement, which we both know and I have proven they don’t.

          Because now one asshole with 500 different alts across the fediverse can take any post he wants and massively downvote it, enforcing consequential action against opinions he doesn’t like, and no one is the wiser.

          That’s why we deal with the one having 250 upvotes, and give 500 upvotes to whoever disagrees with it, letting that opinion rise to the top instead.

          • Armok: God of Blood
            link
            fedilink
            English
            21 year ago

            Again, this is why one account per person is the most important part of this system functioning. Bots, brigading, alts, etc. all undermine the way the system should work. In fact, they undermine an upvotes-only system too, since one person with 5,000 bot accounts can make anything look popular.

            • @pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              Which is not possible because you can’t guarantee one account per person, anyone can make as many alts as they want, specifically on other servers that can then inundate a post on a target one. That’s why it’s so problematic.

              In retrospect, federation itself is a terrible idea the way it’s been implemented. I don’t think the developers took the fact that humans are inherently evil into account.

              In fact, they undermine an upvotes-only system too, since one person with 5,000 bot accounts can make anything look popular.

              This also is true. 🤔 Allowing people to vote on other people’s comments in general is so deeply problematic.