You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
3

[–] bhrgunatha 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

I agree, it's putting the cart before the horse - we don't even know if this will happen yet. Currently, downvoting is only enabled with a certain level of IP, so brigading and bot armies are not necessarily guaranteed to be a problem.

No reason not to talk about it though :)

Plus I think it's too open to abuse. People have already thought about malicious targeting; there are surely other cases that haven't been though about yet. Let's wait until this place is popular enough to attract troublemakers and deal with them then.

0
1

[–] kittypuppet [S] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

This place has one person I've seen so far running around in threads calling people shills and just generally being rude, which is partly what spawned this idea.

2
0

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

I can agree with this, I think there are people on both ends of the spectrum that will result in some abuse. I have seen users who reject intellectual discussion due to their narrowed opinion. This has spawned users both on the "anti-conspiracy' side as well as lead people on the 'conspiracy' end to automatically associate people who reject their perspectives as shills. I think that there is a deeper cause to it and overall it's intent normally is to drive conflict and disagreements. If there were some sort of way to flag a 'negative contribution' it may help avoid the conflict that arises. This will also have to be a solution that would allow someone being bullied or downvoted to do something other than be harassed.

I think the "shill vs conspiritard' is a real issue that has spawned on reddit and if nothing is done to prevent such conflicts then Whoaverse is just as vulnerable to abuse.