[–] [deleted] 3 points 112 points (+115|-3) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

2
42

[–] dragon_oats 2 points 42 points (+44|-2) ago 

"Hey everyone from this other site, upvoat me on my voat thread" or "lets upvoat my corporate agenda to voat." There's just no way for individuals to compete with that or have a fair debate about anything when it happens. Downvoats aren't the issue, it's a symptom of groups creating an exposure advantage.

0
16

[–] programmerguy 0 points 16 points (+16|-0) ago 

To a certain extend this can be prevented by filtering out suspicious votes. For example ignore any votes if the thread was visited via a link from a different website.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
0

[–] Oknatora 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

So we change the system. Why?

If you think these groups will not find another way, you are fairly naive. The system we have now is good, it works. People will exploit anything.

1
12

[–] blackblarneystone 1 points 12 points (+13|-1) ago 

that works for me. people will never, ever stop abusing the downvote as long as it is an option. its human nature.

6
0

[–] Broc_Lia 6 points 0 points (+6|-6) ago 

How do you mean abusing it?

0
2

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

The reality is that downvoat = I do not like what you said.

That's totally OK. The problem is that for some people downvoat = I don't like you.

0
1

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

Or just removes votes all together. It encourages hive mind.

5
84

[–] arrggg 5 points 84 points (+89|-5) ago 

Adding Agree/Disagree would help solve this.

Upvote for ontopic/important, downvote for offtopic/spam/shitpost. Agree if you agree, Disagree if you disagree. That way you could upvote and important topic and disagree at the same time.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 23 points (+23|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
13

[–] arrggg 0 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago 

Up-down-left-right is a great idea, it would look cool too.

0
11

[–] g2n 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

No. Right should be support, left should be disagree.

0
1

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

I life the idea of (Left|Up|Right) votes, get rid of the visual down button altogether. Have the left be disagree, up be the current up, and right be spam/bad faith arguing etc.

  Display it like (Disagrees|Agrees|Likelihood of being Spam), have the spam deduct points of CCP but the Disagree solely just be a number next to the comment. Massive disagreement thereby leads to a some upvotes and few CCP instead of being punished with CCP deductions.

  Ending of circlejerk fighting as people are sick of being fake for votes and punished for honest opinion. Downvotes punish, end that and we can never be Reddit. However you cannot fight human nature's need to express disapproval, concede to it on good terms.

0
0

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

I would rather keep the up/down concept and instead just display a sort of menu with possible reasons when doing a downvote: disagree, spam, irrelevant, old ...

Then treat each score independently. Each option will affect the score differently (disagree won't change the points but it will be displayed in the downvote area) and if enough % of people vote a post as spam then it will be easy to identify it as spam and to flag the person who made the post as a possible spammer.

I doubt that anyone in practice will upvote in any way when they mark it as spam/disagree/etc, and having two different upvote buttons (agree and quality/relevance) is just gonna be annoying or confusing for people, specially depending on the post (some posts are just objective information/news that you can't really agree/disagree with, while others are pure opinions).

0
13

[–] planetron 0 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago 

I like your suggestion.

Because sometimes there are sensible post that a lot of people may disagree but never seen light of the discussion because it was downvoated to oblivion.

0
3

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

I disagree, but i upvoted your comment because it is constructive to the discussion/solution.

0
3

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

Too inelegant. I don't want 4 buttons plus a report button.

I know we want downvoats to be for off topic and shitposts, but the reality is very different. Both upvoat and downvoat are sort of "catch alls" for many different views - I might upvoat because I agree, or because I appreciate the content, or because it's a productive comment, or because I'm thanking them for admitting they're wrong and changing their opinion, or a myriad of other reasons. But in most situations, either the reasons for the voats are self-explanatory, or there are comments that follow and fill in those blanks.

0
5

[–] arrggg 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

That is the problem, a catch-all does not explain if you agree or disagree, it just forces it lower on the page.

Disagree should not mean its not worth viewing or conversation, those are the most interesting conversations.

[–] [deleted] 3 points 23 points (+26|-3) ago 

[Deleted]

4
11

[–] Nurdoidz 4 points 11 points (+15|-4) ago  (edited ago)

It is a per-sub setting already.

Edit: I think it's a stupid idea to make it mandatory to set all subs at 100 as @nomerasques is suggesting. It is an optional feature and I don't see why it needs to be changed. If sub owners want a limit, they'll put a limit.

[–] [deleted] 2 points 38 points (+40|-2) ago 

[Deleted]

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

[Deleted]

0
6

[–] LemonRose 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

How about for every 25 upvotes you give, you get to give out one downvote?

0
2

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

Instead of an arbitrary limit, I'd like to see the subverse downvoat settings set based on a user's upvoat/downvoat ratio. Example: I only want users in my subverse to downvoat if they have a history of handing out 95% upvoats. That way I would know it's not some newbie handing out downvoats to everyone at random for kicks and giggles.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
15

[–] LegoMyEgo 0 points 15 points (+15|-0) ago  (edited ago)

I agree. Any idea on what kind of changes are needed?

Edit: One thing to help against spam is take away the ability to reverse CCP scores by users deleting negative scored comments. Right now someone who posts spam and gets -50+ downvotes can delete that comment and be reset to 0.

0
35

[–] Atko [S] 0 points 35 points (+35|-0) ago 

Well, for a start, downvoting restrictions need to go. If a new user joins today, they will be downvoted to oblivion if they say anything unpopular and that will trigger anti-spam filter and add daily quotas for submissions and comments . I'll remove all this today and we'll go from there.

0
6

[–] LegoMyEgo 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

That makes sense. Hopefully you can figure out a better system. Thanks.

0
3

[–] jaguar0405 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Thank you. This has been the primary barrier to my participation in Voat. I got into a political debate with an established user in my first days here, who proceeded to ransack my CCP by mass downvoating my comments. So I have been lurking primarily for the past month, watching a strange amalgamation of Reddit's most vile members, most conservative members, and most liberal members all be equally frustrated and come over here, and wondering if I will be able to participate.

0
3

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

Just to be clear, individual subs can still restrict downvoting (for all users) right? It's a very useful tool for dealing with the eventual brigades.

0
1

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

You basically just removed the one stop-gate measure preventing shills from creating hundreds of accounts and using them to control conversations. With the limit in place they might get a few accounts to the downvoat limit buy the majority won't reach that point. Voat was better with the limit in place, in my opinion.

What steps are you going to put in place to prevent this type of widespread social engineering now that the limit is gone?

[–] [deleted] 0 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
10

[–] Atko [S] 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 

Agreed. I'll remove this penalty in a few minutes.

0
17

[–] identifier1 0 points 17 points (+17|-0) ago  (edited ago)

If you remove this how do you plan on combating spam? I guarantee we'll see another onslaught of amalek posts immediately after you remove the penalty.

0
0

[–] 1010011010 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

There could be a "Right of Reply" function where if the grandparent comment was the same user, then none of the downvote-based rate-limiting is applied.

Meaning you don't have the problem where people are going back-and-forth in an active discussion but the unpopular position gets silenced because they have to wait several minutes between replies.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
13

[–] rwbj 0 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago  (edited ago)

This article and associated research paper ought be required reading on this topic: Data Mining Reveals How The “Down-Vote” Leads To A Vicious Circle Of Negative Feedback

Essentially downvoting seems to do little more than damage online communities. The data show it really doesn't work as a punitive measure and is actually correlated with those who get downvoted not only sticking around, but posting progressively lower quality stuff. And on top of that they also become more likely to downvote other users in turn which creates a nasty domino effect.

An issue that was not mentioned is that it also seems, in the long run, to result in hiveminds in communities. Some people are always going to use downvotes as a petty dislike or "take this!" button. Trying to educate people not to is akin to trying to teach people to control their emotions. In other words it's going to fail. But when people do use it as a dislike button it ends up censoring out submissions and comments which run against the grain of a community. As a result of this the only things that end up getting actively discussed in a community in the longrun are things everybody already agrees to. Great for insecure folks seeking affirmation that their beliefs are 'correct', not so great for any sort of reasonably intelligent and interesting conversation.

0
4

[–] WatDabney 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Great for insecure folks seeking affirmation that their beliefs are 'correct', not so great for any sort of reasonably intelligent and interesting conversation.

Exactly, and this is exactly why I've shifted to the position that downvoting (and quite possibly voting as a whole) should not exist at all - because it's a thing that explicitly benefits those who are just seeking affirmation at the expense of those who are interested in reasonably intelligent and interesting conversation, which is exactly the opposite of what a forum should be doing.

0
3

[–] Rea11yN0tMe 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Not that I necessarily disagree, however voting on comments engages the users and draws them in, even if they are not taking part in the discussion. In the comments section of online news sites for example I miss my up and downvote button.

0
0

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

You should look at Hacker News. I usually don't bring this up because I know people will freak out - but yeah, the discussion on that website blows Voat/Reddit/Digg/anything else out of the water in terms of constructive comments as a whole.

But.. there are differences: for one - they don't have verses/subs. So I'm not sure if it's a fair comparison.

Downside is that it's mostly about business / programming.

Edit:

  • Reddit: funny
  • Voat: fair
  • Hacker news: technical

0
2

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

Quite interesting. Is there any data of communities without a downvote button?

0
2

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

4chan :P

0
13

[–] savageslav 0 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago 

@Atko In my opinion comments sorting options and number of comments loaded on the thread must change in order for people to be heard. If you look at top comments most of the time is one random sentence reply that was one of the first comments made in that particular thread. All meaningful discussion is not easily accessible to random viewer unless they sort by new or load more comments. Also I noticed that people are responding to top comments not to replay to that comment it self, but to make sure that their comment can be seen by majority of visitors.

Here is few examples currently on front page:

https://voat.co/v/politics/comments/413113

https://voat.co/v/news/comments/411192

https://voat.co/v/AskVoat/comments/410069

My recommendation would be to allow us to set our preferences if we want to sort comments by new, top, controversial, etc ... Clicking NEW every time you open a thread gets kind of old really quick. I know this is similar to "other site" but in my opinion it is something that worked well over there.

0
9

[–] Atko [S] 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

I agree. We'll need to work on that.

0
0

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

A sorting option that combines 'new' posts with 'top' posts would be fantastic addition imo. Example comment thread:

  1. most popular comment
  2. newest comment
  3. 2nd most popular comment
  4. 2nd newest comment

etc.. ideally with options

0
0

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

I'd suggest adding better metrics too. It'd be great to sort by funny, serious, informative, or even options set up by subverse moderators that are local to that subverse only. This sounds hard but it's not that bad. All you'd need do is add a 'tag' option to the bottom of every post. When a user clicks on it, a little bar pops up with funny, serious, informative, tag1, tag2, tag3 (the last 3 set by mods). The user clicks again and the tag is added to the post (or if you prefer, their vote is put into that bucket). Most people won't bother to use this, but enough will use it to provide useful information to the sorting algorithm.

3
6

[–] blackblarneystone 3 points 6 points (+9|-3) ago 

i think taking away downvotes is not a terrible idea. keep it simple . upvote good stuff, ignore bad stuff. have a report button for illegal/disruptive stuff.

give everyone unlimited upvoting ability.

1
5

[–] sakuramboo 1 points 5 points (+6|-1) ago 

What about making the downvoat button just hide the post/comment? Best way to ignore something is to remove it from vision.

0
6

[–] blackblarneystone 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

not a bad idea at all

0
1

[–] EveningCrickets 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

I like this idea. I wonder if it would be feasible to make it permanent and sitewide (like a killfilter). So, if you downvoat someone you (and only you) never see another comment from them. Or perhaps the comments are still loaded, but are collapsed and sorted near the bottom.

Furthermore, I wonder if it would be useful to allow a mods to define multiple upvoat buttons with different meanings. For example, in a politics subverse there might be an "upvoat liberal" and "upvoat conservative" (and allow each user to determine which one they want to sort by).

I could see that encouraging participation because it makes minority opinions easier to find, thus encouraging like-minded people to stick around rather than leaving. People can sort by their personal viewpoint if they want to nod their head and agree, or by the opposing viewpoint if they want to debate or learn more about the other side.

Edit: I could also see value in an "upvoat funny" along with a way to sort those near the top or bottom. I hate it when the top comment is a joke. It would be nice if I could configure funny comments to be at the bottom.

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

[Deleted]

0
1

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

not sure what you mean by "becomes a report button"

0
0

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

Terrible idea.

It'll be like digg with the "sponsored" posts. Front page would be flooded with posts which would receive massive amounts of upvoats from bots/brigades so they can promote their shit. Without a downvoat button, no one would be able to get that rubbish off the page seeing what the post + author would be trying to do.

0
0

[–] blackblarneystone 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

no way at all, huh?

5
-5
load more comments ▼ (65 remaining)