Hi all, I haven't downvoted (and typically don't for these types of sites), but I wonder what exactly the protocol for downvoting is? I read the FAQ about when you should downvote. Is there a forced entry for why you are downvoting snaps/comments? Maybe in this way people who are downvoting legitimate comments that add to the opposite side of the discussion can be curtailed. If someone loses privileges to downvote, because they only seem to be downvoting opposite opinions (as opposed to just straight up spam/trolling), I wonder if it would allow for the healthy environment here to survive longer.
I don't think telepathy is a feature in the site. How do we distinguish between someone who thinks what they're downloading is not contributing to the site and someone who simply disagrees with what they've read?
Are you asking about someone who is lying (intentional or not) about the reason why they are downvoting? That certainly would be the next question about how to handle arbitration.
I don't have any specific ideas off the top of my head, but I'm sure there are ways of allowing the community to try to suppress this type of activity.
Granted. The point being we're never going to be able to determine with any degree of certainty whether someone was using downvotes simply to punish or if they genuinely felt they were discouraging bad behavior. I don't think we'll ever be able to eliminate the use of the downvote as a button for "I disagree."
Hi all, I haven't downvoted (and typically don't for these types of sites), but I wonder what exactly the protocol for downvoting is? I read the FAQ about when you should downvote. Is there a forced entry for why you are downvoting snaps/comments? Maybe in this way people who are downvoting legitimate comments that add to the opposite side of the discussion can be curtailed. If someone loses privileges to downvote, because they only seem to be downvoting opposite opinions (as opposed to just straight up spam/trolling), I wonder if it would allow for the healthy environment here to survive longer.
I don't think telepathy is a feature in the site. How do we distinguish between someone who thinks what they're downloading is not contributing to the site and someone who simply disagrees with what they've read?
Are you asking about someone who is lying (intentional or not) about the reason why they are downvoting? That certainly would be the next question about how to handle arbitration.
I don't have any specific ideas off the top of my head, but I'm sure there are ways of allowing the community to try to suppress this type of activity.
Granted. The point being we're never going to be able to determine with any degree of certainty whether someone was using downvotes simply to punish or if they genuinely felt they were discouraging bad behavior. I don't think we'll ever be able to eliminate the use of the downvote as a button for "I disagree."
You're right unfortunately.