[–] 650615? 0 points 10 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago
I disagree with removing downvoats. Not only will it allow worse quality content to reach the front page even more, but people will only see the upvoats, say 10 of them on a submission and think it's something people like when in fact they can't see that the post actually has double or triple the amount of people who dislike it than like it. Very bad idea to remove downvoats imo. I think the 100CCP is a good limit for it.
[–] 12_Years_A_Toucan [S] 1 point 0 points 1 point (+1|-1) ago
What about removing it just for comments?
[–] 650903? 0 points 5 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago (edited ago)
Even for comments I don't think they should be removed. But that's just me. I respect yours and others opinion and reasons for removing them though. I just feel that removing them altogether, the negatives of it will outweigh any positives that could come of it.
[–] umpaloompa 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
The problem with 100 CCP is that eventually most of the site will get 100 CCP which will results in the same effects it had on reddit:downvoting = disagreeing.
I prefer to have the report as spam button remove content. If more people have reported something as spam vs. the amount it was upvoted. Then we could actually get rid of downvotes.
The best thing we, as a community can do is to have 2-4 day trial and see how it works out and if people prefer the idea of no sort of downvoting.
[–] boater 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
What about for comments which violate sub verse specific rule violations, such as posting spoilers in a no-spoiler thread?
People will want some way to hide these comments, and removing the ability to downvote will remove the ability of communities to do this themselves and instead force them to rely on the presence of extremely active moderators.
I think the ideal solution is to change "downvoting" to "downmodding", where in order to "downmod" a comment, users must select an objective and specific rule that the comment has broken from a finite list of choices specific to each subverse.
Upon clicking the downmod arrow, what will happen is that the site will create either a drop-down menu or overlay containing a list of radio buttons. Then, in order for the downmod to go through, the user must select a specific rule violation from the list, ex. "spoilers", "only contains insults", "spam".
This could encourage users to be more objective and impartial with their downvotes, rather than using them subjectively in the same manner as they would upvotes. It would also allow different subverses to maintain different rules for downvoting, and allow for no downvoting in subverses with no rules.
[–] UlteriorMotives 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
I think this could work really well. The purpose of the voat mechanic is to push quality content to the top and crap content to the bottom, correct? If people can still upvoat quality content, it would rise to the top while the crap content would sink to to bottom because it has less upvoats.
[–] 12_Years_A_Toucan [S] 1 point 0 points 1 point (+1|-1) ago
That's my general thought process as well!
[–] boater 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago (edited ago)
Downvoting is necessary to enforce subverse specific rules in a decentralized manner in instances where a subverse does not possess a moderator available 24-7 and still wants to hold structured conversations.
For instance, suppose there is a collective desire for a subverse for discussing a series of books where the majority of participants want a strict "no spoilers" rule enforced in comments in threads without a spoiler tag in the title.
Removing the ability of users to downvote would require the presence of extremely active moderator, or for people to draw additional attention to the spoilers and spam by posting additional comments under them.
I think that a possible solution is to have the downvote button open a list of subverse specific rule violations each time it is pressed. This way in order for a downvote to go through, the downvoter must select the reason they are downvoting the comment from a finite list of options every time.
The list of rule violations which a downvote must fall into to be considered "valid" would be equivalent to the list of sidebar rules of each subverse, and determined by the subverse creator, the subverse moderation team, or perhaps by a majority of active subverse participants via a direct amendment process.
This would allow different subverses to develop different policies and cultures concerning the use of downvoats.
[–] UlteriorMotives 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I like the idea of the drop down. I still don't know that simple upvoats wouldn't accomplish that purpose though. If I post a spoiler to the Game of Thrones sub without a spoiler tag - it shouldn't be upvoated. By not upvoating me, you are condemning me to the bottom of the pile. It will still show up under "new," but you really shouldn't be browsing new if you're an episode behind.
Back to the drop down though. I like the idea in theory, but what's to stop me from just selecting anything regardless of whether or not it applies?