It's no surprise that this would be common, especially in some subverses. But those that are supposed to be serious and for discussion often get poisoned by this. Up-votes and down-votes can make things rather one-sided and into a hive-mind of sorts.
How can we, mods or the community at large prevent hive mind mentality? Even if people don't downvote comments or posts that go against their beliefs they are less inclined to upvote than someone that agrees and makes other good points. Doesn't this foster some sort of hive mentality and where is it a good thing and where is it a bad thing? If I don't have an opinion yet about a topic and the highest comments are all about x is really y does this mean that it is right?
Does this promote conformity and stifle discussion indirectly?
Sort: Top
[–] Stavon 0 points 12 points 12 points (+12|-0) ago
The only thing to prevent a hive mind is to think for yourself. Don't only visit subverses and news sites which support your opinion, read news from different sources and be critical of all of them.
[–] nilceps [S] 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
What if I observe the hive mind in a community? The problem I see is as communities grow bigger recognition of other members is shrinking which means the barrier of falling into the blind punish/award protocol grows.
If I don't have the generally accepted opinion I might get punished by others by getting downvoted wouldn't my normal reaction then be "Well those guys don't like me guess I'll leave for something else" and even if people don't downvote me but I reach way less upvotes than another commenter that made a comment that the "hivemind" liked.
[–] Porphyrogennetos ago
All you can do is resist it.
Call out the hypocrisy, irony, double standards, logical fallacies etc etc
There's more than enough work to go around.
[–] FiftyShadesOfBlack ago (edited ago)
I doubt it can be avoided. The algorithm (threaded comments, up/down votes, showing the comments with the most upvotes first, hiding the comments with more downvotes (does Voat do that?)) inherently leads to a hivemind.
The best way to resist is not to care about the imaginary Voat-points.
[–] Stavon ago
If you recognize it, you're less likely to adapt to it.
That's why people sharing an opinion gather and tell themself that this opinion is the right one. When the group grows it's now longer important who it is, as long as he belongs to the group.
If your opinion is slightly off, you likely adopt, if it's far off you seek another hive with might fit better. The interesting states are inbetween, the insecure ones. Studies showed that the unsure members of a hive are most extreme in defending it and "missionaring" for it. Another part of unsures tries to rebel and see what happens.
Negative feedback coming for the group identifing with is very strong, probably stronger than positive one. There is not much you can do about that, the human mind is not as smart as it thinks it is. All you can do is to be aware of the cognitive biases your brain suffers from.
[–] mAineAc ago
This is the most important thing. Most people skip this step because they may overtly agree with something. They stop thinking about it and they don't carry the thought out to conclusion. Being critical of everything is the most important step and people tend to skip it.
[–] humanmilkfarm 0 points 6 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago (edited ago)
Maybe don't show how many points a comment has until you vote on it? People are often easily swayed to one side if they see everyone else's vote so they can know how they should feel about something, and so they don't need to spend all that extra precious mental energy making their own mind. Votes can gain momentum.
edit: reddit has a similar optional temporary feature that has to be enabled on a per subreddit basis. I always thought something like this should be default permanently. Maybe allow a "show points" button if someone doesn't want to have to vote on every comment.
[–] ColaEuphoria 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
On top of this, Karma shouldn't be seen as a total accumulation on users' profiles. It should remain localized to the context it took place.
[–] BunceWaggon 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
That actually sounds like a really good idea
[–] humanmilkfarm 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Wow, that almost makes too much sense.
[–] [deleted] ago
[–] humanmilkfarm ago
That's why I suggested a "show points" button that doesn't upvote or downvote.
[–] nilceps [S] ago
Couldn't this be easily exploited though all I would need to do is give an upvote look at the score and then form my decision around that? And what about cascading votes, i.e. "This guy has been downvoted before I know that he is wrong further down the thread.
I've seen some of the subs that used those features but they didn't seem to do much, maybe it's because the community has already settled and wouldn't change their opinion but I think the problem is still there with positive and negative reinforcement.
[–] humanmilkfarm ago
I guess if you consider your mind your own enemy, then it would make sense to call it an exploit. The point is help remind people to make up their own damn mind. Sometimes that extra barrier, however little, can make a huge difference.
[–] FreshieD 0 points 4 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago
To prevent hive mind, I think you have to start by identifying what promotes it. In my opinion, what promotes hive mind is karma-greed. People want big karma numbers because it's an ego boost. Saying a comment that you know other people agree with, in an environment where karma is free to give, results in more karma gained than stating an opinion that is polarizing and receives both up- and downvotes.
I think that the 100cpp requirement for downvoats certainly helps prevent hivemind. I've seen more interesting, lively discussion in a few days of Voat than I did in a year of Reddit. New users can't just sign up and start downvoating everything they disagree with. Were I the one in charge, I would probably take that even further. I would institute a policy of cpp as "vote currency"; with an upvoat costing you one cpp to give, and a downvoat costing 2, or maybe even 3 cpp. I'm not sure if that would work as I've never seen a site work that way, but it would be different, and I think it would be worth the experiment.
[–] Arotaes_Forgehammer 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
That would be cool, but eventually all CCP would be removed with no way to introduce it back, or collect in a few users (ahem /u/_vargas_)
[–] FreshieD ago
Perhaps add in that you always get a certain amount of free upvoats per 24 hours, much like how new users now get 10 or 20. That keeps fresh cpp coming in, but keeps upvoats still high enough value as to not just throw them about for any little thing you agree with and downvoats valuable enough to only really use them for complete toolbag posts.
[–] FiftyShadesOfBlack 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Sorting comments by votes promotes hive mind too.
Also hiding comments with negative points, but I'm not sure Voat does that.
[–] big_fat_dangus 0 points 4 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago
I'm getting sick of all these "how can we stop humans from acting on human nature?" posts. You can't, dude. What you can do, is speak your mind, and see what happens. People might agree, they might not. Deal with it.
[–] Sadistic_Bastard 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I was about to post the same thing. It's just how the human mind works, there's no way around that.
[–] NicolaeCeausescu ago
Exactly. No one has any kind of 'right' to have their views even acknowledged here. Make your statement, just like anyone else can. If it's not popular, fucking deal with it or go somewhere else. This is the type of shit that gives rise to places like SRS on reddit. Fucking STOP IT.
[–] nilceps [S] 2 points -2 points 0 points (+0|-2) ago
Do you have no friends that have different political opinions? Do you just hang around with the people that agree with you? What I see what is see isn't humans being humans but communities showing weird mannerisms like saying "We are about discussions" while they are not.
[–] big_fat_dangus 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
I don't know what you're talking about, and it sounds like you don't either.
[–] RipSteakface 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
By not downvoating comments you disagree with. Use your downvoat to sort relevance. If you disagree with something, reply to the comment. Have a conversation, maybe see their point of view and why they believe what they believe. Otherwise, the top comments will always be a circlejerk of the most politically correct thing to say, and any real depth in controversial questions is lost.
[–] vudu 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Upvoat things you disagree with!!! As long as it creates conversation
[–] AlderaanDuran 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Honestly, on any site that keeps track of "points", it's impossible. Many people don't like getting downvoted, so they will tend to withhold comments they know would be unpopular. This means that "popular" comments dominate. If there's a circlejerk going on about how much Reddit sucks, and how banning FPH was a violation of free speech, a comment coming in and saying "It was a toxic community and I agree with the banning" would be heavily downvoted. And that's just one relevant example. So, people refrain from posting that sentiment. So all your left with is the circlejerk/hive comments getting heavily upvoted.
That's the one problem with sites like voat and reddit, the "points". Not all of us care about them, I don't. I've taken plenty of downvotes on here for unpopular opinions and don't care. So have many others. But there is a large majority of people who care about upvotes, and more importantly don't want to get downvoted. So they withhold comments. In the end, that prevents true discussion, and what you're left with is a comment that everyone agrees with, followed by a bunch of other comments that are "Yeah, I know right!?" All of them getting upvoted.
So, I don't have an answer, but displaying points and keeping track of points is like keeping score for a lot of people. It will guide discussion whether that is the intent or not.
[–] [deleted] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
[–] nilceps [S] ago
I think the problem lies with the fact that a user can punish/award other users so popular opinions are elevated while unpopular opinions are buried just by merit of democracy (The bigger group is able to punish/award more than the smaller group). This could drive out the other group to make their own little world where they are the majority and similarly can punish/award those things they want to.
I think that problem is the biggest in opinionated subs as opposed to topical subs though even there such a divide can exist (See /r/fitness with SS+SL and /r/bodybuilding with PPL).
I'm just thinking out loud here but smaller groups fracturing to make their own doesn't seem that smart as it just leads to opinions going to the extremes and discussions turning into circlejerks.
[–] Stavon ago
Many "minds" with the same cognitive dissonances reinforcing themself.
[–] [deleted] ago
[–] NicolaeCeausescu ago
You can't. It is simply impossible. Don't try and make people behave the way you want them to - that's what happened to reddit and good riddance, too. No one is going to change their ways. They'll just move somewhere else where there are less restrictions. And that's basically why this site exists.
Don't ruin this site, too.