Downvoting - More cons than pros

[mi7chy]

Cons:
Form of online bullying
Creates a hostile environment
Takes up more database storage space for what?
Overall, it makes the environment worse and works against attracting more participation

Pros:

Can't think of any.

Can we nuke it? One of the worst aspects of Reddit too while Facebook group discussions got it right.

 

[ericgtr12]

Cons:
Form of online bullying
Creates a hostile environment
Takes up more database storage space for what?
Overall, it makes the environment worse and works against attracting more participation

Pros:

Can't think of any.

Can we nuke it? One of the worst aspects of Reddit too while Facebook group discussions got it right.

They have downvoting?

 

[arn]

Pros:

Controversial / Inflammatory comments get downvoted off the article page. Without it, the same comments can get voted up, but never voted down.

 

[benshive]

I like downvoting being an option. I don't see it being used that much but there are some comments that definitely deserve it. I like the way it's done here. I really don't like the way reddit handles them with there being one number that goes up or down and you can't view how many voted each way.

 

[ericgtr12]

Pros:

Controversial / Inflammatory comments get downvoted off the article page. Without it, the same comments can get voted up, but never voted down.

^ This 100% it really keeps things tidy over at Reddit and is one of the better features IMO. Additionally, it allows you to simply express disagreement without saying anything, avoiding heated exchanges.

I must be missing something because I have yet to see it here on MR?

 

[arn]

^ This 100% it really keeps things tidy over at Reddit and is one of the better features IMO. Additionally, it allows you to simply express disagreement without saying anything, avoiding heated exchanges.

I must be missing something because I have yet to see it here on MR?

It's only available on News story comment threads.

 

[AngerDanger]

Cons:
Form of online bullying
Creates a hostile environment
Takes up more database storage space for what?
Overall, it makes the environment worse and works against attracting more participation

I don't think somebody disagreeing with you is bullying.

And personally, I'd rather my post get a little red circle beneath it than recive a quote-reply that specifically calls me out.

 

[oneMadRssn]

I like the downvoting. It would be nice if, like on reddit, it gave you the up/down ratio as well.

 

[yaxomoxay]

I'd rather my post get a little red circle beneath it than recive a quote-reply that specifically calls me out.

I can't downvote you here, so here's my angry reply to you

Spoiler

have a great day!

 

[johannnn]

Takes up more database storage space for what?

Lol we should remove features because they take up a bit of storage space? Wouldn't e.g. disabling profile pictures be a better option?

Form of online bullying
Creates a hostile environment

This sounds very subjective and from someone young that can't take critique. It should be perfectly fine to express disagreement with an opinion.

 

[TiggrToo]

Takes up more database storage space for what?

Huh? How you work that out?

At best I’m guessing the data type required is a TinyInt, most likely an SmallInt, MediumInt, Integer or a Char(1).

None of those will shift the overall needle on storage on little bit.

 

[ericgtr12]

Huh? How you work that out?

At best I’m guessing the data type required is a TinyInt, most likely an SmallInt, MediumInt, Integer or a Char(1).

None of those will shift the overall needle on storage on little bit.

I had a chuckle at that myself.

 

[KALLT]

Controversial / Inflammatory comments get downvoted off the article page. Without it, the same comments can get voted up, but never voted down.

Is it necessary though to show these dislikes (as in the icons) in the forum? I do see acceptable comments being downvoted that seem neither controversial nor inflammatory. It looks harsh to see the red thumbs down icon. Maybe the look can be tweaked?

I’d like to see an option to just hide the likes/dislikes area altogether.

 

[I7guy]

What I don't like is a serial downvoter. However, I don't know how one can mitigate that. I know that arn said there is 12 votes in 24 hours. However, I think downvoting should be subject to the same rules as PRSI....100 posts.

 

[boswald]

"Promotes bullying"... really? If you follow/stalk a specific user and constantly downvote them, that's one thing. But, say, you downvote people who are anti-Apple (why they're here in the first place is beyond me, but...), I think you're doing the right thing.

 

[Madhatter32]

Pros:

Controversial / Inflammatory comments get downvoted off the article page. Without it, the same comments can get voted up, but never voted down.

The down voting on this forum is a disincentive for participation and stifles different but valid viewpoints in my opinion. If it is meant to penalize controversial or inflammatory remarks, the solution does not fit the problem. It simply ends up as a way to register one's disagreement, which should not result in someone else being voted down. Should the forums be popularity contest? No one should be penalize for expressing a valid opinion or point of view. The proper mechanism to reduce controversial or inflammatory remarks is to have an option to either "report" the commentator which already exists or have the option to register something that accurately describes what the moderators are trying to accomplish like the term "inappropriate" or "troll" or "offensive" or something like that -- but not "disagree."

 

[tranceking26]

I'm all for a disagree option, not everything will be agreed on, plus people come out with some right garbage on here at times lol.

 

[xxray]

Where is the downvote button for this post?

I like the disagree option. It’s an easy way to get an idea of how many people disagree with an opinion and allows you to show that you disagree. Disagreeing with an opinion ≠ bullying or disliking a person.

 

[mi7chy]

And personally, I'd rather my post get a little red circle beneath it than recive a quote-reply that specifically calls me out.

More credit is given when people can articulate why they disagree. Not just on a forum but in general. At a minimum, downvoting should require articulating to promote dialogue and self thinking.

 

[mi7chy]

But, say, you downvote people who are anti-Apple (why they're here in the first place is beyond me, but...), I think you're doing the right thing.

Let's play. This is my oldest Apple product that was released in 1977. What's yours? It's ok not to be a blind fanboy.

 

[arn]

Separately if you think you are being specifically harassed by downvoting, we do address that differently. And you can report that.

 

[mi7chy]

Separately if you think you are being specifically harassed by downvoting, we do address that differently. And you can report that.

It's not about me. I'm fine with ignoring. Only raise the issue because I feel it affects the community as a whole. Going to give it some more time to find one positive.

 

[Plutonius]

They have downvoting?

Only on the post under news articles.
[automerge]1594213834[/automerge]

At a minimum, downvoting should require articulating to promote dialogue and self thinking.

I would have to disagree in many cases.

Sometimes the articulating back and forth seems to cause issues that require moderator input.

I believe that a simple downvote will express the posters opinion without leading to prolonged arguments.

Besides, only the person being down voted sees who actually downvoting them (in the case of multiple likes) and the total number of downvotes is not shown (i.e. the public only knows that someone disagreed).

Years ago, the forum indicated the number of likes and dislikes on all post which caused issues.

I like the current implementation and wish it was forum wide.

 

[Stephen.R]

And personally, I'd rather my post get a little red circle beneath it than recive a quote-reply that specifically calls me out.

To me the problem with a "disagree" option (albeit it's much less of a problem here than other places I've seen it a 'downvote') is that it's easy to just "la la la I'm not listening you're wrong". Forming an actual coherent argument to disagree with someone takes more effort.

Other sites (notably tech-focused sites) like /. and Lobste.rs use reasoned downvotes: you can't just "down vote" or "disagree". You have to specify why (from a choice of several usually: 'troll', 'incorrect', 'off topic', etc). My understanding of the logic here is that if you actually disagree, you can put that disagreement into words to explain your view, whereas if someone e.g. commented a tired disproven trope, you'd use e.g. the 'troll' option - responding is unlikely to be productive, and it's not so much that you disagree with the view but that the post is not genuine.


But my experience with how downvotes (actual unreasoned downvotes, not just "disagree") on a orange-themed site that shall remain nameless has conditioned me to never downvote anything.

IMO if a post is just a difference of opinion, it has a place in a conversation. If it's just a hot take based in tin foil conspiracies a coke addict would be jealous of, it doesn't, and a better option would be to just flag it.



Just my ฿0.02
[automerge]1594217509[/automerge]

Besides, only the person being down voted sees who actually downvoting them

... I definitely see all the people who downvoted comments in the News threads.

 

[ericgtr12]

It sounds like the staff here is a proponent of this feature, any reason it's not being implemented all over the site (or did I miss a conversation somewhere about that)?