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 →
[–] UlteriorMotives 0 points 1 point 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?
[–] boater 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago (edited ago)
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.
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.
[–] UlteriorMotives 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Alright. I'm convinced. It seems like it could potentially solve the "problem" of downvoats by making it more difficult to just downvoat for the heck of it while still allowing the downvoat to do its job of moderating content faster and more effectively than a mere lack of upvoats.