Lemmy Instances can disable downvotes (I added this a while back), but I personally really like downvotes.
FB, twitter, youtube, all either don’t have them, or removed them, with reddit one of the last sites willing to keep a dislike action.
But also, why does a downvote need an explanation, but an upvote doesn’t? If someone doesn’t want to tell you why they like / dislike your comment, they shouldn’t have to.
But also, why does a downvote need an explanation, but an upvote doesn’t?
Because the downvote is for me like criticism. Something is obviously wrong with the thing and i want to know why. I want to learn from it and understand whether i should adapt my behavior or not. And this decision is only possible when i know the reason for every downvote.
Also, because upvotes are harder to explain. Usually there all something like “interesting, hand’t thought about this before”. When you have 20 upvotes, they are probably all very similar.
However, for downvotes it is different. You can downvote things because of:
factual errors (for instance when some number is relevant but wrong. -> I want to know which number is wrong and the source.)
missing contextual information (article is negative on topic X, but after knowing Y, it is not that negative anymore and understandable. --> I want to know that.)
information is correct, but because of bias/stereotypes, the person downvotes. The information in the article explains these things, but the person is too lazy to read that and downvotes before reading. I want to know that so i can ignore the downvote.
etc. So many different reasons to downvote. All of them are important to me.
For me downvotes are a feedback system. So i can differentiate good articles from ones with errors.
If someone doesn’t want to tell you why they like / dislike your comment, they shouldn’t have to.
But what should i do with this feedback? What if its because of bias, stereotypes? and the person is not interested in participating in the debate?
i find something that makes online discussions more fun and less frustrating is to learn to just accept the downvotes… sometimes they make you want to lash out and say, “hey wtf did i say, do you not agree? if not why not!?” but at the end of the day… just relax… they are just internet points… it’s a lot more relaxing to just see the number, and say to yourself… “damn… guess i misstepped on that one somehow… oh well”… and just move on. like the above poster says, no one actually owes you an explanation, after all. just remember that downvotes are part of the game, they are going to happen, and try not to let it get to you.
also, i’ll add, sometimes you want to own those downvotes… sometimes it’s okay to have a dissenting opinion, and you should learn to role with that. “20 downvotes, i hit a nerve I guess, but fuck it I’m right and I’m sticking with what i said.” I feel like going out after a bad-ass comment and asking for downvote explanations just takes away from any solid position you were trying to take.
Slashdot has (had? haven’t been there in a long time) a system in which you can upvote/downvote but also assign a reason, i.e. it’s funny, insightful, off-topic, spam. Perhaps it could be taken further so you could upvote a good comment but also signal you disagree with it somehow - this is especially helpful in political discussions as I don’t like to disrespect people I disagree with who are debating in good faith.
also, imagine a big discussion. Where people write 50 words and one responds with “I disagree.” and responds to explain why one detail is wrong.
This is easy to be missunderstood as “all/most of those 50words are wrong”. So i like the force to explain downvotes as separation between criticism and aggreeing stuff.
When debates get heated, people will forget that. They will forget to cite at all. They will downvote like hell. And all that makes debating culture difficult.
And i can tell from personal experience, that people do not explain their downvotes. You have to ask and even then, only some answer.
With that, i can tell you: the current way won’t lead to constructive learning, where people understand each other.
isn’t the point of a down vote that it’s lower friction than “I will now explain to you why I think this is wrong / bad / off-topic”? like… if your expectation is that people should respond to everything they think is bad, then a. that means that trolls can suck up infinite time/energy and b. why even have down votes
I talk about many legitimate questions, not ones with the intention to troll. Like, where actual content is happening, debates and such.
I have to ALWAYS ask what the reasons are which is really annoying. Like, i don’t know what to do when i read an article, agree with it but it has some downvotes.
Or when i see some minor issues, i wonder: was this the reason for people to downvote it? Or was it something else? like factual errors or missing out important things? Or did the person reading it just disagree with the opinion stated there or just dislike it?
Downvotes itself are fine. but the lack of reasons is annoying for me, not the downvotes itself. What i seek is intellectual debate, understanding concepts. And this is so much harder when negative feedback is not explained properly.
I talk about many legitimate questions, not ones with the intention to troll. Like, where actual content is happening, debates and such.
I agree with this. I have had experiences where I felt like I was saying something as simple as 2+2=4 and downvoted for reasons that seemed inscrutable to me.
I think it is healthy to challenge irrational mobs who downvote for no reason, or for petty reasons. Reasons, that, if challenged and put into language, would turn out to be ridiculous and expose the pettiness driving downvotes.
This is part of a concern I’ve had with the irrational mobs at reddit. A long time ago, there wasn’t really any set rule about downvotes, but if you asked why you were downvoted, irrational mobs don’t like that. So they like when you don’t ask, and so a norm was created that you’re not allowed to ask about downvotes, which helps reinforce the mob behavior.
So if anything, I want that to have to be normalized: it’s regular, normal, expected, reasonable, appropriate, to ask from time to time why the downvotes are happening and expect an explanation, especially in unusual cases where the downvotes seem to have no reasoning behind them.
So if anything, I want that to have to be normalized: it’s regular, normal, expected, reasonable, appropriate, to ask from time to time why the downvotes are happening and expect an explanation, especially in unusual cases where the downvotes seem to have no reasoning behind them.
This is what i do, but i feel many people downvoting don’t read that, so i never know the reason
So ideally, i would like to force users to explain their downvotes. And every explanation is fine, for me. Like also things like “troll” and just that.
I hate it when people here are downvoting things without explaining the reasons for it!
Lemmy Instances can disable downvotes (I added this a while back), but I personally really like downvotes.
FB, twitter, youtube, all either don’t have them, or removed them, with reddit one of the last sites willing to keep a
dislikeaction.But also, why does a downvote need an explanation, but an upvote doesn’t? If someone doesn’t want to tell you why they like / dislike your comment, they shouldn’t have to.
Because the downvote is for me like criticism. Something is obviously wrong with the thing and i want to know why. I want to learn from it and understand whether i should adapt my behavior or not. And this decision is only possible when i know the reason for every downvote.
Also, because upvotes are harder to explain. Usually there all something like “interesting, hand’t thought about this before”. When you have 20 upvotes, they are probably all very similar.
However, for downvotes it is different. You can downvote things because of:
etc. So many different reasons to downvote. All of them are important to me.
For me downvotes are a feedback system. So i can differentiate good articles from ones with errors.
But what should i do with this feedback? What if its because of bias, stereotypes? and the person is not interested in participating in the debate?
i find something that makes online discussions more fun and less frustrating is to learn to just accept the downvotes… sometimes they make you want to lash out and say, “hey wtf did i say, do you not agree? if not why not!?” but at the end of the day… just relax… they are just internet points… it’s a lot more relaxing to just see the number, and say to yourself… “damn… guess i misstepped on that one somehow… oh well”… and just move on. like the above poster says, no one actually owes you an explanation, after all. just remember that downvotes are part of the game, they are going to happen, and try not to let it get to you.
also, i’ll add, sometimes you want to own those downvotes… sometimes it’s okay to have a dissenting opinion, and you should learn to role with that. “20 downvotes, i hit a nerve I guess, but fuck it I’m right and I’m sticking with what i said.” I feel like going out after a bad-ass comment and asking for downvote explanations just takes away from any solid position you were trying to take.
shout out to lemmy for not having aggregate comment karma
deleted by creator
Slashdot has (had? haven’t been there in a long time) a system in which you can upvote/downvote but also assign a reason, i.e. it’s funny, insightful, off-topic, spam. Perhaps it could be taken further so you could upvote a good comment but also signal you disagree with it somehow - this is especially helpful in political discussions as I don’t like to disrespect people I disagree with who are debating in good faith.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
also, imagine a big discussion. Where people write 50 words and one responds with “I disagree.” and responds to explain why one detail is wrong.
This is easy to be missunderstood as “all/most of those 50words are wrong”. So i like the force to explain downvotes as separation between criticism and aggreeing stuff.
When debates get heated, people will forget that. They will forget to cite at all. They will downvote like hell. And all that makes debating culture difficult.
And i can tell from personal experience, that people do not explain their downvotes. You have to ask and even then, only some answer.
With that, i can tell you: the current way won’t lead to constructive learning, where people understand each other.
isn’t the point of a down vote that it’s lower friction than “I will now explain to you why I think this is wrong / bad / off-topic”? like… if your expectation is that people should respond to everything they think is bad, then a. that means that trolls can suck up infinite time/energy and b. why even have down votes
I talk about many legitimate questions, not ones with the intention to troll. Like, where actual content is happening, debates and such.
I have to ALWAYS ask what the reasons are which is really annoying. Like, i don’t know what to do when i read an article, agree with it but it has some downvotes.
Or when i see some minor issues, i wonder: was this the reason for people to downvote it? Or was it something else? like factual errors or missing out important things? Or did the person reading it just disagree with the opinion stated there or just dislike it?
Downvotes itself are fine. but the lack of reasons is annoying for me, not the downvotes itself. What i seek is intellectual debate, understanding concepts. And this is so much harder when negative feedback is not explained properly.
I agree with this. I have had experiences where I felt like I was saying something as simple as 2+2=4 and downvoted for reasons that seemed inscrutable to me.
I think it is healthy to challenge irrational mobs who downvote for no reason, or for petty reasons. Reasons, that, if challenged and put into language, would turn out to be ridiculous and expose the pettiness driving downvotes.
This is part of a concern I’ve had with the irrational mobs at reddit. A long time ago, there wasn’t really any set rule about downvotes, but if you asked why you were downvoted, irrational mobs don’t like that. So they like when you don’t ask, and so a norm was created that you’re not allowed to ask about downvotes, which helps reinforce the mob behavior.
So if anything, I want that to have to be normalized: it’s regular, normal, expected, reasonable, appropriate, to ask from time to time why the downvotes are happening and expect an explanation, especially in unusual cases where the downvotes seem to have no reasoning behind them.
This is what i do, but i feel many people downvoting don’t read that, so i never know the reason
So ideally, i would like to force users to explain their downvotes. And every explanation is fine, for me. Like also things like “troll” and just that.
deleted by creator