I don't like an Up/Downvote system because of the possibility for abuse, and because it's fundamentally misleading. If you take two competing ideas posted as comments, 'A' and 'B', and pit them against each other in both systems how might it look?
Like system
A = +1000
B = +10
Up/Downvote system
A = +1000
B = -910
So which one shows the most important information? With the Like system, you can see idea A has 1000 supporters while idea B has 10 supporters. With the Up/Downvote system, information is drowned out by supporters of idea A. How many supporters are there of idea B? You don't know because the number is hidden by the downvotes of a competing idea. Also, along with this information being hidden I think this is also hurts discussion because it encourages users to succumb to peer pressure. A user who might normally agree with idea B may side with idea A because it doesn't look like idea B has any supporters.
Under any system that allows a hive mind to decide on the content, certain ideas will proliferate across it.
Like system
A = +1000
A = +600
A = +500
A = +200
B = +10
It also allows for abuse of the system, where a vocal minority can manipulate the content to push their agenda. Take /r/SRS (non-redditors this is a sub-reddit that targets comments and posts that goes against their opinions and downvotes them). Applying the same concept but with "like" you could easily push your ideologies to the top.
The way the admins are handling it is by far the best approach. They are moderating the effect of the downvotes by the frequency of downvotes by the user. That way people who do abuse it, and downvote any opinions that they disagree with, won't make much effect.
I agree and instead of downvote have a report button. If the downvote button is to remove content that adds nothing to the discussion then those comments should probably be removed anyway. People are less likely to report posts if someone else has to read them (the mods) and sees who did the reporting. Therefore it would only be used when a post does have to be removed.
I don't like the term "report" for the button. I see that and think the person has posted something threatening or racist and so it's alerting the admin/mods about the behavior. The only downvote I remember giving was for a comment that was only 'Murica! There's nothing threatening or racist about it, but I find that a waste of a post, plus I find the term terrible, being used to dismiss a population of Americans who, while I disagree with them, may have a good point about the constitution if you bother to listen to them. But is it worthy of a mod's attention if i "report"ed it?
Maybe the tags should be changed to something like "Well Said!" vs "Poorly Written" or something like that.
Are the posts in question removed immediately or after admin review? Both ways could be problematic:
- Immediate removal gets rid of unpopular opinions quickly. Even if the removed posts / comments are reinstated later by admins, chance is the discussion is already over.
- Moderation queue has the same problem in reverse: bad content isn't removed fast enough, and site users are still subjected to it.
I don't like an Up/Downvote system because of the possibility for abuse, and because it's fundamentally misleading. If you take two competing ideas posted as comments, 'A' and 'B', and pit them against each other in both systems how might it look?
Like system
A = +1000
B = +10
Up/Downvote system
A = +1000
B = -910
So which one shows the most important information? With the Like system, you can see idea A has 1000 supporters while idea B has 10 supporters. With the Up/Downvote system, information is drowned out by supporters of idea A. How many supporters are there of idea B? You don't know because the number is hidden by the downvotes of a competing idea. Also, along with this information being hidden I think this is also hurts discussion because it encourages users to succumb to peer pressure. A user who might normally agree with idea B may side with idea A because it doesn't look like idea B has any supporters.
You over simplifying the situation.
Under any system that allows a hive mind to decide on the content, certain ideas will proliferate across it.
Like system
A = +1000
A = +600
A = +500
A = +200
B = +10
It also allows for abuse of the system, where a vocal minority can manipulate the content to push their agenda. Take /r/SRS (non-redditors this is a sub-reddit that targets comments and posts that goes against their opinions and downvotes them). Applying the same concept but with "like" you could easily push your ideologies to the top.
The way the admins are handling it is by far the best approach. They are moderating the effect of the downvotes by the frequency of downvotes by the user. That way people who do abuse it, and downvote any opinions that they disagree with, won't make much effect.
I agree and instead of downvote have a report button. If the downvote button is to remove content that adds nothing to the discussion then those comments should probably be removed anyway. People are less likely to report posts if someone else has to read them (the mods) and sees who did the reporting. Therefore it would only be used when a post does have to be removed.
I don't like the term "report" for the button. I see that and think the person has posted something threatening or racist and so it's alerting the admin/mods about the behavior. The only downvote I remember giving was for a comment that was only 'Murica! There's nothing threatening or racist about it, but I find that a waste of a post, plus I find the term terrible, being used to dismiss a population of Americans who, while I disagree with them, may have a good point about the constitution if you bother to listen to them. But is it worthy of a mod's attention if i "report"ed it?
Maybe the tags should be changed to something like "Well Said!" vs "Poorly Written" or something like that.
Are the posts in question removed immediately or after admin review? Both ways could be problematic:
- Immediate removal gets rid of unpopular opinions quickly. Even if the removed posts / comments are reinstated later by admins, chance is the discussion is already over.
- Moderation queue has the same problem in reverse: bad content isn't removed fast enough, and site users are still subjected to it.