0
2

[–] pegarrett 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

I think down votes should be used on comments that don't add to the thread and for posts that are not appropriate for the subverse they are posted to. Not for showing disagreement with a comment or post.

0
2

[–] Trypter 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Yeah it might be disagreement, but it's also a chance for people to say, this should not be rated as good a story as this other one, or that it's not newsworthy.

0
2

[–] spryes [S] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Generally this never happens though. If someone disagrees, they will downvote. It's too powerful to think "this opinion is bullshit, I want to hide it." Even if it's directly relevant to the discussion.

0
1

[–] NateThomas1979 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Honestly I like the idea of only getting so many upvote/downvote clicks a day/hour. It makes you avoid circlejerk mentalities because you can't simply spam either.

0
0

[–] BrazilianRider ago 

I dunno how it'd work, but I'd like to see a system where you have to give a short explanation to each downvote. Then if you clicked on a link under the comment, you could see all the "reviews" (anonymously, of course) and the ones that were illegitimately downvoted could be flagged so the mods can investigate.

0
0

[–] spryes [S] ago 

That's really interesting, I actually like that.

0
0

[–] feanturi ago 

You've got good points, and I agree with your reasoning for how they are bad. But if used correctly, downvoats are good. That's the thorny issue, everybody has a different idea of what "correctly" means. To me, it means downvoating comments that are intentionally inflammatory or that make poor arguments against some comment they are attacking. Sometimes just because they're being an asshole. Plus modifiers based on my mood at the time. It's a moving target.

And I am not referring to people that I may wind up in an argument with. My downvoats are generally given as an observer rather than a participant. I generally refrain from downvoating my nemesis-of-the-hour on principle. Unless they're coming off like a psycho. But that's another thing, what I think makes someone downvoat-worthy is different to someone else.

I think that the primary rule to look at is that downvoating should be reserved entirely for comments that do not further the conversation at hand. If they do further the conversation but do not conform to your worldview, you should not downvoat it. Because you disagree, you would actually be better served by letting it rise to the top, if rising it is. Because it will be seen by more people, which will give more people on your side, more eloquent than you, the chance to see it, and refute it skilfully. If you downvoat it, it has less of a chance of being seen by someone that really knows how to "put them in their place". If nobody champions you, then maybe you've got something you need to look at in yourself. It's really a win-win when you don't downvoat people you disagree with.