You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
2

[–] boater 0 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.

0
1

[–] UlteriorMotives 0 points 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?

0
2

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

If I post a spoiler to the Game of Thrones sub without a spoiler tag - it shouldn't be upvoated.

What if the thread is only 1 hour old and there are only 2 comments, and one of them is a spoiler? If no one ever read a comments with 0 upvoats, then there would never be comments with more than 0 upvoats. If several people are reading the thread and currently formulating a reply in an effort to create comments worth at least 1 upvoat, they should still be able to enforce the subverse specific rule of no spoilers and downvoat the spoiler comment in the meantime so that others looking for good comments do not view it by default.

An important part of creating a good signal to noise ratio is hiding and reducing the noise, not simply increasing the volume of the signal in an effort to compete with low quality spam.

I like the idea in theory, but what's to stop me from just selecting anything regardless of whether or not it applies?

Laziness, culture, and education. Laziness in the sense that you no longer have access to one-click downvoting, you have to perform at least 3 clicks and do some reading. Culture in the sense that this functionality would serve as a constant declaration to every user that the intended purpose of downvote is to enforce objective rule violations and is not a disagree button. Education in the sense that every time you try to downvote, you are forced to read and parse the subverse sidebar rules and be subconciously indoctrinated into being a model citizen of that subverse.

This will of course not prevent a determined individual from subjectively downvoting, it will simply decrease the likelihood of unwanted downvoting, by promoting the notion of good or objective downvoting in its place.