I downvote for people being assholes (trolling, bigotry, ad hominem, etc), spreading misinformation, or making comments which don't add to the conversation ("This.", "This is the way."), and rarely for anything else.
I upvote content that I find interesting, educational, funny, etc. I also upvote people for being polite and willing to admit to being incorrect ("Thanks for the information, I didn't know that", etc).
I generally don’t downvote. I report a comment/post if they break rules. I block users that are stupid, mean, comment in bad faith, or are otherwise negative to my experience. I use an app that allows me to apply unique labels to users that only I can see if I am not quite ready to block them but want to be ready on next offense. I.e., someone who uses dog whistle language but I’m not sure it was intentional.
Most of the accounts I made for Lemmy are on instances that disable downvoting. That wasn’t planned on my part, but I don’t mind.
I’m not sure if this is just another way of saying what others have said, but I also upvote if something accomplished the theme of the community. The example that comes to mind is from the other site, but if something on r/mademesmile actually made me smile, I upvoted. As for downvotes, I usually save them for posts that I want to be less visible for whatever reason. Sometimes that is because I disagree sometimes it is because they are reposts, or low effort trolling, etc. Right or wrong, that’s how I do it.
Wow, I’ve used Reddit for years, and I have never ever seen such a guideline before! Now this is a really interesting post, and the comments are pretty insightful that make me think.
Yes, it totally makes sense not to upvote or downvote based on agreement or disagreement, but based on relevancy and accuracy. But what if the author is asking about our opinion, and someone has already commented my exact opinion? It feels natural to upvote it based on agreement.
Here’s an example: there’s a post asking about opinions, maybe advice, and then there are two comments. One that says “do drugs, kids, it’s good”, and one that says “no, don’t do drugs, drugs are always bad”. And I absolutely agree with one of those comments. If I upvote the one I agree with, and leave the other alone, maybe even downvote it, then the author of the post will see comments with weight. On the other hand, if I don’t do anything, because “oh look, someone already commented my precise opinion, so I’m done here”, then the author of the post might remain in doubt, because there will be two equally presented opinions and that’s like no advice at all.
So all in all, it makes sense to have a system about what to upvote and what to downvote, but there are just things that feel wrong to upvote, even if the etiquette dictates that it should be upvoted.
Nevertheless, it would be a great idea to come up with a system (that can be applied in any situation) and stick to it.
Here’s my take though:
What it felt like on Reddit by others:
Upvote: totally random
Downvote: totally random
What it feels like on Lemmy + what my impression of the voting system has been up until now:
Upvote: agree/useful/my girlfriend’s post or comment
Downvote: strongly disagree/useless/spam/troll
From now on:
Well… this post definitely makes me think. I still have to make up my mind.
Open Firefox, install the containers addon, open an instance you have an accout with in a new container, and sign in. Label that container specifically for the url of that instance. Repeat for every instance you have an account with.
never used that addon before, could work. Something I failed mentioned, but tryied to hint at is that the default Lemmy looks bad imo. And hotswitching accounts are cool. While default lemmy lacks features, like some apps count your “score”, how cool’s that?
Up/downvotes are not intended as dis/agreement buttons. You are supposed to upvote relevant content and downvote irrelevant content, spam, trolls, hate, and misinformation/propoganda.
Upvoting on the basis of liking something played a large part in reddit’s decline, where every sub was inundated with off-topic shit-posts of r/funny and r/adviceanimals circle-jerking. They were upvoted for a cheap laugh, but should’ve been downvoted for being off-topic.
The best example I had on reddit illustrating the importance of maintaining the integrity of community topics was this:
Do you think it’s okay for r/wtf material of animals to be posted in r/awww or r/EyeBleach? If r/TheOnion posts were posted in r/WorldNews?
Comments on subs like r/TIL and even r/science became nothing but irrelevant jokes and memes, which buried relevant discussion. This voting behavior is why subs like r/nonononoyes lost their purpose and were spammed with shitty r/funny cross-posts.
I strictly upvote on the basis of relevant content. My wife has thought I’m crazy when I show her something we both are entertained by, and then she sees me promptly downvote it. Even if I enjoy something, I will downvote it if it’s an off-topic post.
Conversely, I upvote dissenting opinions I don’t agree with, even if I’m debating someone, if it is promoting topic discussion. When people downvote out of disagreement, it suppresses dissenting opinions and healthy discourse.
Downvoting due to disagreement is what leads to toxic echo-chamers. (Again, there’s a clear difference in downvoting content promoting hate/racism/bigotry.)
Upvoting on the basis of cheap entertainment promotes off-topic and low-quality discussion/posting behavior.
Upvote for funny posts, posts that contribute to the discussion even if they drift a bit off topic, and anything that promotes positivity.
No upvotes/downvites for things I disagree with that are just differences in opinions, or something that is trying to be funny but doesn't work for me. Also posts I just don't understand or understand the context.
Downvotes for people being jerks, posting misinformation, promoting terrible stuff like fascism, racism, sexism, etc. It does mean I mostly downvote anything positive about US conservatives, but that is because they tend to promote those things I mentioned already.
I sometimes also downvote people who go overboard with generally positive things by assuming anything other than agreeing with their narrow view is automatically malicious. Some of us are trying and admitting we aren't perfect or that maybe there is more than one way to be supportive than the one they think the only way.
asklemmy
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.