parent
  • caelreth
    +7

    1.) This can really apply to upvotes, too, we just tend to be more worried about the negative. The problem is that both votes are anonymous, so a person could be targetting anothers user's snaps/comments and up- or down-voting based on that. Or a user could search for a certain term and vote based on the term. So, what would be needed is almost a moderator just to look at the votes and 'confirm' them. Of course, that opens a entirely new can of worms.

    2.) Seems like there should be a way to 'report' a chief/mod abusing 'power' that maybe triggers a review, perhaps by a randomly chosen group of other tribe leaders or users who aren't part of that tribe?

    3.) I'm doing what I can :)

    • Crator (edited 8 years ago)
      +5

      I think you bring up a good point upvotes can be abused to. It mostly results in a hivemind, where people say certain things and conform to popular opinons simply to get upvotes. I don't think anything can be done about this however. Every system comes with flaws.

      • caelreth
        +2

        Aye, and there will always be someone there to exploit those flaws... eventually.

    • Moderator
      +5

      1. Right. At least upvotes don't do any obvious damage, though.

      2. Like a tribunal. Obviously, we'd need to keep in check the tribunal itself. Maybe if all their actions are made public, and Team Snapzu oversees them.

      3. That's all we can ask :)

      • caelreth
        +4

        1.) Well, non-obvious damage can still be damage. If snaps are artificially inflated to seem accurate/liked/good, then that could begin people to doubt the ratings at all when (if this happened often enough) obviously bad posts are still upvoted regularly.

        2.) Basically what I was thinking, yeah.

        3.) Then I shall carry on! :)