EDIT: Maybe just for comments? Downvoats may still help with content quality control
There is some good in the concept of downvoating however in practice we've seen and continue to see the primary use a downvoat button will be an "I disagree with this person" button.
Removing downvoating entirely will not negatively impact the site. Misinformation will still be called out and not upvoated, spammers should be reported(hoping for that report button one day), ass holes will be called out, irrelevant posts and comments will be ignored/receive very few if any upvoats or get reported.
Removing the downvoat ability would also deal with any future issues with brigades, which was a big issue on that other place.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] forbidden_arts 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
In addition to spreading misinformation, we're bound to have people who post malicious content (e.g. gore in an inappropriate sub), and it is useful to have a mechanism to suppress those links or comments.
The one drawback is that people can and do use the downvoats to express disagreement, which leads to echo-chambers and circlejerks. Perhaps we could allow the Mods for a particular sub to regulate whether downvoats are allowed instead of making it a site-wide issue?
[–] Xelios 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Personally, my biggest gripe with the downvoat system is brigading against a user or subreddit or ideology, which sort of fits into disagreement. The problem I have with allowing Mods to regulate only is that it relies on having good mods. Some guy mgiht make a sub that becomes hugely popular but doesn't hire good mods or care to regulate it (we've seen it a lot over at reddit), which means that these sub's will have no effective regulation. It could also lead to suppression of content/censorship.
We'd see threads like "This mod has been suppresing users and censoring any time they try to speak up!" and even though the post would be well intention, you know what would happen because of it? Brigading.
This is why I'm not really for removing the power from the users entirely.
[–] forbidden_arts ago
We're already beholden to having "good" mods.
In a sub like /v/news or /v/politics (which, on the predecessor site generate a lot of content), I'd argue that downvoats should be disabled or restricted, because expressing an unpopular opinion shouldn't cause a user to get fucked over.
[–] 12_Years_A_Toucan [S] 1 point 0 points 1 point (+1|-1) ago
Thoughts on leaving it for posts but not comments? Comments are easier to simply call out
[–] forbidden_arts ago
I'm just not sold on the idea of removing it, because honestly I don't really see the point.
If there's a sub that generates a massive amount of content and traffic, ignored posts would sink (almost) as fast as those being downvoated. If a sub doesn't have a lot, then obviously downvoats would have more of an impact, but that's useful when you have a tightly knitted group as a lot of small subs do.
I understand the argument you're making, and I think in certain instances it holds true, which is really why it should be decided by Mods and not by Admins.