1. UPVOTE : Express agreement and put relevant content up-front.
2. IGNORE (Do nothing): Disagreement. Let the content "sit" where it is.
3. DOWNVOTE : Bury unrelevant content.
That's it. Honestly, I feel like Snapzu's prior users simply are too polite to tell us to just freaking adapt to their local culture. That's how this website works, it's not really up to us to change it. Jesus Christ, what is so hard to understand? We, Reddit shipjumpers, have to get accustomed to the local rules, not bend them around our will...
To people saying that downvotes are bad because they push content down so its harder to see: downvotes just add a little more heft to your voting. But if there are, say, 1000 posts, they have to be sorted in some kind of order. Something has to be in the 1000th spot, and the 999th, and the 1st etc. Provided you don't hide posts with a certain number of downvotes, downvoting won't "hide" content from the users. Whoever thinks that the 1000th post won't be seen because it has been downvoted out of sight... there will still be a 1000th post with just the upvotes/neutral voting system. So you're still pushing some things to the top and in the process, albeit more passively, pushing other things down.
Not really. The idea is that content that we don't agree with shouldn't be pushed down, simple left where it is. It's not up to someone who doesn't agree with the idea we have to make it unseen. A comment with enough downvotes will be hidden from sight - completely. A comment nobody agrees with will be down there, but still accessible. It's a subtle difference, yes, but there is one.
I honestly do think that people here have a strange view of downvotes; people tie so much negativity to it, they're upset when they get downvoted. If people were complaining because they felt like their point was valid yet they'd received -50 points, I'd be sympathetic and I think it would warrant investigation. If people were complaining because people were really abusing the downvotes (i.e. going through a users profile and downvoting all of their content out of spite, or multiple users banding together to gang up on a person and supress their opinion by downvoting, downvoting because of the user instead of the content etc.) it would warrant investigation. But so many people complain about one downvote! I think that reflects immaturity and I think that's different from what people in this thread are defending. I think that those people complaining about a single downvote aren't doing so out of fear of snapzu turning into reddit, it's something more akin to vanity, at least in some cases.
People aren't complaining particularly about those single downvotes. They don't fear for their own reputation, neither do they show "vanity" because of it... People are complaining because of the slow culture shift that could happen if this goes unnoticed and unaddressed for too long. Snapzu is older than our arrival - circa 2012, I believe? It has its own identity and way of working. I definitely aren't here to change that, as this way of working was what brought me here in the first place.
And if there's a rule that says not to downvote just because you disagree, then why isn't there a rule that says not to upvote just because you agree? Why should people's reasons for downvoting be questioned any more than their reasons for upvoting? Nobody seems to be worried that they got upvoted solely because their opinion is a popular one, rather than...
1. UPVOTE : Express agreement and put relevant content up-front.
2. IGNORE (Do nothing): Disagreement. Let the content "sit" where it is.
3. DOWNVOTE : Bury unrelevant content.
That's it. Honestly, I feel like Snapzu's prior users simply are too polite to tell us to just freaking adapt to their local culture. That's how this website works, it's not really up to us to change it. Jesus Christ, what is so hard to understand? We, Reddit shipjumpers, have to get accustomed to the local rules, not bend them around our will...
To people saying that downvotes are bad because they push content down so its harder to see: downvotes just add a little more heft to your voting. But if there are, say, 1000 posts, they have to be sorted in some kind of order. Something has to be in the 1000th spot, and the 999th, and the 1st etc. Provided you don't hide posts with a certain number of downvotes, downvoting won't "hide" content from the users. Whoever thinks that the 1000th post won't be seen because it has been downvoted out of sight... there will still be a 1000th post with just the upvotes/neutral voting system. So you're still pushing some things to the top and in the process, albeit more passively, pushing other things down.
Not really. The idea is that content that we don't agree with shouldn't be pushed down, simple left where it is. It's not up to someone who doesn't agree with the idea we have to make it unseen. A comment with enough downvotes will be hidden from sight - completely. A comment nobody agrees with will be down there, but still accessible. It's a subtle difference, yes, but there is one.
I honestly do think that people here have a strange view of downvotes; people tie so much negativity to it, they're upset when they get downvoted. If people were complaining because they felt like their point was valid yet they'd received -50 points, I'd be sympathetic and I think it would warrant investigation. If people were complaining because people were really abusing the downvotes (i.e. going through a users profile and downvoting all of their content out of spite, or multiple users banding together to gang up on a person and supress their opinion by downvoting, downvoting because of the user instead of the content etc.) it would warrant investigation. But so many people complain about one downvote! I think that reflects immaturity and I think that's different from what people in this thread are defending. I think that those people complaining about a single downvote aren't doing so out of fear of snapzu turning into reddit, it's something more akin to vanity, at least in some cases.
People aren't complaining particularly about those single downvotes. They don't fear for their own reputation, neither do they show "vanity" because of it... People are complaining because of the slow culture shift that could happen if this goes unnoticed and unaddressed for too long. Snapzu is older than our arrival - circa 2012, I believe? It has its own identity and way of working. I definitely aren't here to change that, as this way of working was what brought me here in the first place.
And if there's a rule that says not to downvote just because you disagree, then why isn't there a rule that says not to upvote just because you agree? Why should people's reasons for downvoting be questioned any more than their reasons for upvoting? Nobody seems to be worried that they got upvoted solely because their opinion is a popular one, rather than because it was a quality contribution to the discussion.
Because that's what an upvote is. Saying "you've got some quality content there, plus, I agree with you". Read that etiquette again, and all those comments in this thread. It's been explained more times than it should have been.
I feel like Snapzu's prior users simply are too polite to tell us to just freaking adapt to their local culture. That's how this website works, it's not really up to us to change it. Jesus Christ, what is so hard to understand?
I came here from Reddit because of this culture. I don't want to see that change. OP, you have a choice:
1. Adapt to Snapzu culture
2. Use Voat
3. Stick with Reddit
It's okay that you asked the original question, but after your edit/round 2, even I downvoted your post (congratulations...you received my first downvote). Why? You weren't really asking a question and taking in the answers. You were beating people over the head with how it should be. Borderline trolling.
lustig: if there's a rule that says not to downvote just because you disagree, then why isn't there a rule that says not to upvote just because you agree?
folkrav: It's been explained more times than it should have been.
I think here's the core issue with the current voting mechanism: it conflates subjective and objective votes, and incorrectly presents up and down voting as equal but opposite actions. It has to be continually explained to newcomers because the UI isn't aligned with the etiquette, and thus newcomers don't intuitively know how to use it.
There are actually 4 kinds of voting reactions one might have:
1. Subjective positive: I agree with this, yay interesting.
2. Subjective negative: I disagree, what a load of crap.
3. Objective positive: This content is of high quality: well-written, many source links, covers the topic in all relevant areas, etc.
4. Objective negative: Spam, harassment, other TOS violation.
However, since we aren't robots, it's usually difficult to separate the subjective and objective reactions, so an up vote actually means 1+3, and a Snapzu down vote is intended only for 4. Currently there is no way to express 2 except by commenting.
If you ask me, it would be sufficient to address the issue simply by changing the UI. The voting & reputation system itself seems fine. I wonder, though, if it would make sense to have an additional, separate button for the "disagree" vote that wouldn't actually affect the sorting of the snap or the submitter's reputation, just to give people a way to easily express their opinion?
1. UPVOTE : Express agreement and put relevant content up-front.
2. IGNORE (Do nothing): Disagreement. Let the content "sit" where it is.
3. DOWNVOTE : Bury unrelevant content.
That's it. Honestly, I feel like Snapzu's prior users simply are too polite to tell us to just freaking adapt to their local culture. That's how this website works, it's not really up to us to change it. Jesus Christ, what is so hard to understand? We, Reddit shipjumpers, have to get accustomed to the local rules, not bend them around our will...
Not really. The idea is that content that we don't agree with shouldn't be pushed down, simple left where it is. It's not up to someone who doesn't agree with the idea we have to make it unseen. A comment with enough downvotes will be hidden from sight - completely. A comment nobody agrees with will be down there, but still accessible. It's a subtle difference, yes, but there is one.
People aren't complaining particularly about those single downvotes. They don't fear for their own reputation, neither do they show "vanity" because of it... People are complaining because of the slow culture shift that could happen if this goes unnoticed and unaddressed for too long. Snapzu is older than our arrival - circa 2012, I believe? It has its own identity and way of working. I definitely aren't here to change that, as this way of working was what brought me here in the first place.
... Read FullI came here from Reddit because of this culture. I don't want to see that change. OP, you have a choice:
1. Adapt to Snapzu culture
2. Use Voat
3. Stick with Reddit
It's okay that you asked the original question, but after your edit/round 2, even I downvoted your post (congratulations...you received my first downvote). Why? You weren't really asking a question and taking in the answers. You were beating people over the head with how it should be. Borderline trolling.
I think here's the core issue with the current voting mechanism: it conflates subjective and objective votes, and incorrectly presents up and down voting as equal but opposite actions. It has to be continually explained to newcomers because the UI isn't aligned with the etiquette, and thus newcomers don't intuitively know how to use it.
There are actually 4 kinds of voting reactions one might have:
1. Subjective positive: I agree with this, yay interesting.
2. Subjective negative: I disagree, what a load of crap.
3. Objective positive: This content is of high quality: well-written, many source links, covers the topic in all relevant areas, etc.
4. Objective negative: Spam, harassment, other TOS violation.
However, since we aren't robots, it's usually difficult to separate the subjective and objective reactions, so an up vote actually means 1+3, and a Snapzu down vote is intended only for 4. Currently there is no way to express 2 except by commenting.
If you ask me, it would be sufficient to address the issue simply by changing the UI. The voting & reputation system itself seems fine. I wonder, though, if it would make sense to have an additional, separate button for the "disagree" vote that wouldn't actually affect the sorting of the snap or the submitter's reputation, just to give people a way to easily express their opinion?