What are your criteria for upvoting/downvoting?

I hate that I always compare Lemmy to Reddit, but Reddit used to have (not sure if they still do) guidelines called “Reddiquette” that included guidelines about upvoting and downvoting. I don’t remember the specifics (and sending too much of my browser traffic to Reddit makes me feel dirty) but one of the guidelines was not to upvote/downvote on the basis of agreement/disagreement with the content.

On Lemmy, I’m honestly a bit lax about upvoting and downvoting at all. (I’m trying to be better about it.) Buy when I do upvote/downvote, I try to do so on the basis of whether the comment/post “adds to” or “subtracts from” the community or conversation. I can disagree with one comment’s take on some subject but still upvote them if they’ve given me a more nuanced perspective on the issue. If they’re just parrotting well-known talking points and not being thoughtful with their posts, I may downvote them evren if I agree with their ultimate stance.

I’m just mostly wondering how folks on Lemmy think about upvotes/downvotes and what implications that has for the content here.

shinigamiookamiryuu,

I upvote any reply to anything I say and everything I reply to as a way of remembering where I’ve engaged. The only exceptions are things with clear perspective-lacking malice.

noride,

Downvotes are for off topic or inflammatory comments, not for things you disagree with, in my opinion.

gnuplusmatt,

my instance has downvotes disabled - it allows me to move on with my life. Only upping just seems more zen

sour, (edited )
@sour@kbin.social avatar

downvotes are for condescension and things people already mentioned

snooggums,
@snooggums@kbin.social avatar

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.

sour, (edited )
@sour@kbin.social avatar

i meant reasons people already talked about for downvoting

gamermanh,
@gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

For posts:

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.

glimse,

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.

snooggums,
@snooggums@kbin.social avatar

Conservative like slow to change or conservative in the modern political sense which just means trying to undo any progress on personal rights?

glimse,

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.

snooggums,
@snooggums@kbin.social avatar

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!

gamermanh,
@gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

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

southsamurai,
@southsamurai@sh.itjust.works avatar

Generally, it’s based on appropriateness to the C/, effort, and usefulness.

There are exceptions, though there aren’t any on C/s that I actually use. But there might be eventually, there were on reddit.

If something doesn’t fit the C/, that’s a down vote if I notice it.

If something is horribly low effort, even if it’s in the right place, that’ll be a down vote.

Upvotes, it tends to be because something was appropriate to the C/, and/or someone put some work in. But, even a low effort post/comment can get an up vote if it’s personally useful.

I used to up vote anything and everything that was on topic, but lemmy has gotten busy enough that I tend to only vote at all if I interact with the post in some way. So, like a title that indicates the post isn’t something that will interest me, I just scroll past because there’s just so much stuff now. But, I scroll All, and sort by new by default, so I end up scrolling past stuff that isn’t in my subscription list. If I only scrolled through subscribed stuff, I’d probably end up voting the same amount, but voting on everything I saw, if that makes sense.

backhdlp,
@backhdlp@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

Upvote if I find the post good and remember it exists, downvote disabled

Chetzemoka,

I’m pretty liberal with the upvotes. I like to encourage people to participate and an upvote feels like saying “hey I see you and thanks for sharing.” I regularly upvote things I don’t like or don’t agree with, if they are shared in good faith and contribute to the conversation.

Downvotes are for bigots and misinformation/disinformation/lies.

xc2215x,

I agree with it then I upvote. Usually don’t downvote.

Ecksell,
@Ecksell@lemmy.one avatar

You guys have a downvote? Whoa, here on .one we do not.

GONADS125,

I couldn’t stand being on an instance without downvotes, personally. They are abused, but they serve a valid purpose.

(I can see one person downvoted your comment btw.)

Rentlar,

My personal rules

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).

KinNectar,
@KinNectar@kbin.run avatar

@Rentlar This, this is it. I nominate this list for the official Fediquette !

@TootSweet

Rentlar,

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.

schnurrito,

Upvote: it is the same thing I was going to comment, or it is an extraordinarily good post that stands out from the masses

Downvote: it is objectively wrong or doesn’t add to the discussion at all

Vast majority of everything, I neither upvote nor downvote.

clearleaf,

I don’t vote very much because that’s just too much responsibility for me to handle.

helmet91, (edited )

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.

GONADS125, (edited )

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.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • asklemmy@lemmy.world
  • localhost
  • All magazines
    •
    Loading…
    Loading the web debug toolbar…
    Attempt #