I know exactly who this is, even without the username tip-off. Here’s what their record looked like in September:
I happened across the user when looking into a string of -1’s on brand new posts in a small community. They were all the same person, and that person downvoted 244 times for each upvote.
This on its own is not normal behavior. Combine it with this user’s comments - which are pretty much completely on brand for the average Lemmy user - and it becomes even more bizarre.
My instance of choice decided to unilaterally and without any warning whatsoever disable downvotes. Just to “try it out”.
I’m still pissed about it to this day.
I mean that google removes any kind of downvotes is one stupid thing, but that people think this makes content “better” is crazy to me.
Now I do understand that in small communities the weight of a super negative account can be quite an issue… But is removing completely any negative feedback the solution ? Really, it’s all we got ?
Also the simple fact that a lot of this community is from Reddit, IMO it’s not okay to disable a feature like that without even voting on it.
So if you think disabling negative feedback fixes an issue, you have the burden to prove or at least explain the reasoning.
I do think it didn’t make YouTube any less of a cesspool to disable downvotes on it…
Edit : Also while votes are not supposed to replace moderation, they certainly help limiting the reach of spammers. Like if the mods are asleep at least the community can bury the post in the meantime. But no, they just disabled downvotes and made a post about the change the same day. Wtf.
i concur (approved your p.of.view)
I like Lemmy(*)s, and like to ↑ good stuff and to ↓ at very bad stuff. Yes, of course, there is so much of both in here. And since we have many communities, it is possible for opposite points of view to float upward. Until we have a better system, let’s use what we have.
f____g@lemmy.zip?
I have no idea who that is - your alt?
Downvoting is valid. You saying it equals hate says more about you than about the downvoters.
edit: hm, apparently this is about the user doing the downvoting, not being downvoted? Still, this is badly anonymized, and that’s my main point.
I know exactly who this is, even without the username tip-off. Here’s what their record looked like in September:
I happened across the user when looking into a string of -1’s on brand new posts in a small community. They were all the same person, and that person downvoted 244 times for each upvote.
This on its own is not normal behavior. Combine it with this user’s comments - which are pretty much completely on brand for the average Lemmy user - and it becomes even more bizarre.
My instance of choice decided to unilaterally and without any warning whatsoever disable downvotes. Just to “try it out”.
I’m still pissed about it to this day.
I mean that google removes any kind of downvotes is one stupid thing, but that people think this makes content “better” is crazy to me.
Now I do understand that in small communities the weight of a super negative account can be quite an issue… But is removing completely any negative feedback the solution ? Really, it’s all we got ?
Also the simple fact that a lot of this community is from Reddit, IMO it’s not okay to disable a feature like that without even voting on it.
So if you think disabling negative feedback fixes an issue, you have the burden to prove or at least explain the reasoning.
I do think it didn’t make YouTube any less of a cesspool to disable downvotes on it…
Edit : Also while votes are not supposed to replace moderation, they certainly help limiting the reach of spammers. Like if the mods are asleep at least the community can bury the post in the meantime. But no, they just disabled downvotes and made a post about the change the same day. Wtf.
Change instance. Loads to choose from.
Yeah thats what I was going to say too. There’s little keeping you on any specific instance. You don’t have “karma totals” like on reddit.
Nothing against downvoting in general, but some people are extremely toxic about it. I don’t get the point.
Please don’t do a witch hunt - it was censored for a reason. Sorry I didn’t do it thoroughly enough.
I’m not. But if this post should evolve into one, that’s on you. Do the sensible thing and remove it.
i concur (approved your p.of.view)
I like Lemmy(*)s, and like to ↑ good stuff and to ↓ at very bad stuff. Yes, of course, there is so much of both in here. And since we have many communities, it is possible for opposite points of view to float upward. Until we have a better system, let’s use what we have.