[–] HarlandKornfeld14 ago
Again, it's usually self-evident why a post gets downvoated into a oblivion. Like every time a shitlibs posts another conspiracy theory about Trump getting impeached any day, it's no surprise were the downvoats came from. It's usually like, play stupid games, get stupid prizes.
[–] Thisismyvoatusername [S] ago
Actually I disagree. I often do not know why things are up or down voated but suspect it is because the titles of posts appeal or repel them. I have no idea what they think on substance.
People may voat like a herd based on titles. If they actually had to read the articles and post their thoughts we might have a more useful community.
Since that is clearly not practicable, I suggest making everyone at least publicly stand by their voats. What is your objection to that? At least then we could ask them or spelse clearly see the downvoat came from a political opponent or something.
[–] HarlandKornfeld14 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
The problem here is that when a shill makes a shitpost, people should't be expected to respond to effortposts, and often times, shills shouldn't be given any attention at all.
My objection is that it makes browsing more time consuming. Sometimes you can judge a book by it's cover.