Downvoting a post because they weren't the first to respond is silly. Do you compare time stamps or just something with fewer upvotes and lolisted lower on the screen?
It just seems like a weird reason to downvote, and I downvote pretty freely.
Interesting content gets updoot. Spam, misinformation, and conservative politics get the downdoot.
For comments:
Relevant to the discussion (be it top-level or deep in a thread), funny, and factual statements get updoots. Irrelevant comments, false information, poor argumentative skills, and conservative political get the downdoot.
That’s shitty imo. I’m on the left but there’s plenty of conservative politics that aren’t extreme or worthy of burying.
My old coworker was conservative and we had some amazing conversations about politics and culture even though we usually didn’t budge much on our positions. He was my favorite person to talk to about it because he brought in “the other side” that I wasn’t otherwise exposed to.
To the guy I replied to, they’re apparently one in the same. But I’m definitely referring to the former. Sometimes it’s nice to have someone telling you to pump the brakes when you’re cruising on an idea ya know?
Liberals (me included) tend to rely on momentum and sometimes we overshoot. The world needs all kinds of people - even if I disagree with most conservative viewpoints.
I tend to avoid calling slow to change conservative because people and parties who self identify as conservative have been promoting regression on social issues, removing rights, xenophobia, racism, and sexism. They spoiled the term!
Those conversations happen so rarely that it’s not worth even considering that as a possibility until a reply or two has shown that they’re not going to stonewall the conversation.
In person things are one way, but on the anonymous Internet (especially lemmy and reddit) it’s people who are 100% not going to adjust their actively garbage views on things and thus deserve to be treated as the dickheads they too often are
If they don’t like being pre judged based on their political beliefs they should rethink why people have an inherant dislike of them, and maybe change. Or learn to deal with the consequences of having dogshit opinions
I was never a reddit member and so may miss some of that nuance, but I vote for things I enjoyed reading or for folks I enjoyed interacting with. I thought about down voting one thing, but then leaned that group didn't work that way. The whole point was to say something that was against the grain.
Up = Like it, interesting novel take (even if I disagree), funny and clever
No vote with comment = disagree but worthwhile discussing, unintentional but incorrect and/or misleading info.
Down = Spam, low effort to the point it’s insulting (clearly not reading beyond the title), flaming and flamebaiting (this is a big one on forums like this everywhere), trolling, intentionally incorrect or misleading information, off-topic/irrelevant stuff.
Report = hate speech, violence against members of our communities, incessant trolling or flaming or flamebaiting (more than twice in a row).
Thanks for the endorsement! If i run my own server them’s’ll be the rules.
I agree having a general ettiquite/cross-Fediverse rules of conduct that won’t get you banned on most servers. But (within the boundaries of law) I don’t mind if other servers want to impose more or fewer restrictions in keeping with such an ettiquite and how strict it’s enforced. Servers like Hexbear can go and do their silly thing so long as the “trolling the libs” kind of conduct is kept there.
I try to upvote most things I see, especially if someone took the time to comment under one of my posts.
If I downvote, it’s usually because I see someone is actively being rude or is trying to steer something light into something controversial to bait arguments.
I’ve found that the Risa community very much uses downvotes to disagree. I made a harmless joke and got dogpiled on, including a very toxic and rude comment from Stamets.
Since you are a highly respected member there, and really all of Lemmy, I think it would be greatly beneficial for you to openly advocate for people sticking to your logic when it comes to downvotes.
Thanks. I appreciate the sentiment. It is the internet after all so I basically always expect toxicity to some extent, but I was just surprised at the extreme disproportion of the response. Also, I expected more from Lemmy and in particular Risa, but I guess that’s on me.
I’ve found that Lemmy tends to be about 50% more chill than reddit, but it definitely has some similar challenges. I try to be positive on a personal level and try to support others who I see doing the same.
In my experience so far (just a few months) Risa has been one of the most friendly places on lemmy - maybe it was just a full moon or something? Whatever the case, I say positive people are always welcome.
Op… their transparent lie about not wanting to pay 1 pound a day to turn the electricity on should have told you to walk away let alone the structural issues.
Yeah I took the explanation at face value, at first… but the more I think about it, in conjunction with not turning the water on it feels very much like they’re trying to pull a fast one.
I tend to upvote if someone brings something unique to the discussion. If you’re just giving a quick generic response to OP or parroting the same opinion a dozen other people in the thread have already posted, then I’m gonna read your comment and keep going. But if you provide thoughtful content that promotes discussion, provides a unique perspective, or at least had a lot of thought put into it, I’m likely to upvote it. Same goes for the post itself.
I generally avoid downvoting, even if I disagree with the comment. But if someone is factually wrong, misleading, posting in bad faith, or just being a troll, I’ll downvote their comments in a thread and upvote anyone who attempts to be reasonable with them. If two people are just bickering back and forth, they both get downvotes. And as always, any comments that distract from the discussion or are off-topic will get a downvote.
If it contributed to the conversation, I upvote. Especially if it’s well-written and informative.
If it’s off-topic, incorrect, or repetitive, I downvote.
If it’s banal or uninteresting but not actually deleterious to discourse or distracting from the topic, I don’t vote.
I upvote almost all replies to my comments, including those disagreeing with me, unless they clearly didn’t take the time to read and understand my comment.
I vote on almost all comments I reply to, as well.
I use this method as well but I also use the criteria that if I learned something new that is interesting or useful in my life I will upvote. If it’s useless drivel or based on conspiracy theories then I downvote.
asklemmy
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.