Complaing about downvotes? Straight to jail.
post
People even downvote legit news from fairly non-biased sources on Lemmy just because they don't like what is being reported. It's actually kinda wild.
Yes, it's typical.
Votes don't mean much, but communities that deviate from the main spirit have to live with them. (And yes, that's mostly bad, even though in a few cases it's good.)
No, to be fair, they can ban the downvoters
Yes, they can. But that's quite a lot of permanent work. Lots of people interact with the content here without even looking where it is.
I have only seen the "bad" unaligned communities doing that. The ones that actually have interesting stuff seem to just live with the votes.
I don't mean ban every downvoter, but ban repeat downvoters. People who are clearly downvoting most things posted without any pattern.
That requires the effort of either writing or at least running a bot to perform that action, or PieFed can prevent the downvoting before it happens. e.g. Blaze shared this screenshot elsewhere in this OP:

That only impacts communities on Piefed locally. So people unsubscribed from other instances, etc could still downvote and harm a posts visibility across the fediverse.
In any case, I personally haven't identified post downvoting on the whole to be that much of an issue that it is impossible to not notice repeat downvoters by just checking posts a few times a day for a week. Not many people do it.
Obviously if you are running a controversial community it might be different.
So people unsubscribed from other instances, etc could still downvote and harm a posts visibility across the fediverse.
Are you absolutely certain of that - that is not what the feature description seems to indicate? If true, that sounds like a bug request should be submitted, either to fix the feature itself or at least the description to match, although I do not moderate any communities on PieFed so I lack personal experience with this and will have to leave it to you who knows.
I would have naively guessed that it would be trivially easy for PieFed to know which users were subscribed to a community vs. not, but maybe it's in an inaccessible form or something.
Are you absolutely certain of that - that is not what the feature description seems to indicate?
Piefed can't control lemmy instances like that. I don't know if it crosses over Piefed instances (I'll ask rimu later) but I can't see why it would work on lemmy instances. Similarly lemmy.blahaj blocks all downvotes, but it can't stop people outside of lemmy.blahaj from downvoting posts from lemmy.blahaj. People still see downvotes on lemmy.blahaj communities if they're looking at them from lemmy.world. It just means that from a lemmy.blahaj user's perspective, there are no downvotes on anything.
I would have naively guessed that it would be trivially easy for PieFed to know which users were subscribed to a community vs. not, but maybe it's in an inaccessible form or something.
Yeah, Piefed can read this - but it can only control the downvotes on its own instance.
Oh I see what you are saying - PieFed would only count the downvotes from it, or some other PieFed or "trusted" instance, but it cannot stop Lemmy ones from giving downvotes, yes that makes total sense. So long as it controls the sorting feature as well as the displayed total though, that is fine with me.
It is an excellent point that PieFed communities work best when interacted with from a PieFed instance, and with reduced functionality via a Lemmy one. This has become increasingly true as so many new features have gotten added recently - like polls and flairs (user and post) - and will continue to do so as more gets added (like perhaps emoji reactions?:-P).
I try my best to only downvote explicitly hateful or unhelpful comments
But I can get it because I have blocked every single news source I possibly can, and like every three to eight days a new one pops up.
Like, I don't give a fuck about news. I don't want to know how miserable the world is or how much more miserable it is than yesterday. I want to look at kitties and titties and maybe some funny stuff in between and that's about it.
Piefed has built in keyword filters.
The Lemmy.world team has an instance: https://piefed.world/
I don't care about news either, and the amount I see has reduced quite a lot thanks to that.
Once you amass a collection of communities that do interest you, you could browse your subscribed feed instead of all. That's what I've done. It got annoying needing to skip past a lot of content that wasn't relevant to me, was crossposted and showed up as duplicates, or was in a language I don't speak. Then you have a whitelist you can grow when you feel like it instead of a blacklist that needs to be added to when new communities show up. Subbing to one of those new community promotion places lets you see most of the active new communities anyway, and you can check out any interesting ones without them invading your feed first.
Does it stay in the Apple and Nintendo communities or does it get cross-posted everywhere? I don't downvote for dislike, but I don't want to block a general community because some asshat is crossposting just under spam levels.
I downvote for verifiably false.
Same. I see upvotes, upvotes everywhere!
Even if Apple/Nintendo are completely different, that’s still not quite the entire fediverse, right?
verifiably false
Can you provide a link to show that? I went looking but the cross-posts that I saw were in !Apple@lemmy.world and !Apple@lemmy.zip. Since both have "Apple" in the name, that does not seem entirely like spam to me - unless you mean the content is low quality?
I meant that's how I personally downvote. I don't subscribe to either Apple or Nintendo communities but I do see the cross posting spam in other communities and suggested it as a possible reason other people are downvoting.
for some reason i literally can't downvote anything
A good chunk of active Lemmy users are interested in open source and digital freedom. Apple and Nintendo are the opposite, very big on vendor lockin and anti consumer practices.
Valve is exempt from this for some reason however. It’s more like stereotypical basement dwellers treat this like a game where you win by accumulating more imaginary internet points. This kind of tribal behaviour is why threadiverse seems to be failing but at least some people get to feel superior to others in the meantime.
Valve isn't perfect but they've gotten a lot of community good will by not being shitty and vindictive. Nintendo has been just really shitty to their own fans for a long time, with unnecessary litigation and criminal prosecution.
I do agree that tribalism is pretty extreme within the fediverse, but I also don't think that's anything new for any small internet community.
There are plenty of reasons to be shitty at valve but my understanding is the steam deck is modable without breaking warranty
I think people often use /all to browse, which makes sense for a fairly small site like Lemmy. But the downside is that people then upvote or downvote based on their preferences, not the community's.
(Eg, the fellow below who has decided Apple and Nintendo are like Nazis and must always be downvoted.)
But the downside is that people then upvote or downvote based on their preferences, not the community’s.
This is only a downside for niche communites promoting positive topics like equality. Communities about for profit companies, that promote horrible ideas and people, etc are what downvotes are for.
If there was a community called "Nestlé is awesome" I would hope it gets downvoted into oblivion.
I don't like linux, should I downvote all linux stuff? Does that make the fediverse better?
There are various philosophies about how fediverse participation should work. Some would say you should block a community you don't like (but that is not harmful) rather than downvoting its posts (because downvoting is supposed to be a signal that the content doesn't belong on the community where it's posted)
Others vote on posts regardless of their communities, preferring to try to curate the fediverse at large rather than their own feeds
preferring to try to curate the fediverse at large
In my opinion, it is presumptuous and arrogant to attempt to curate the fediverse at large according to one's own preferences.
It is arrogant to think the context of a community overrides anyone's personal preferences on how to interact with the voting system.
I think there's an argument to be made though, that if you're a person who browses the "all" feed rather than subscriptions or individual communities, that there's a point where you should block a particular community you don't want to see rather than continuously downvoting it. When the content isn't harmful but you merely dislike it, it seems reasonable to expect the user to curate their experience at least a little.
There is also an argument that expecting everyone to agree with and follow the unwritten rules of 'voting correctly' is just a vocal minority trying to impose their will on all users.
Generally I limit to subs but browse All occasionally to find new communities. Part of this process is upvoting and down voting stuff and seeing which communities has more stuff I want and less stuff I thought was worth downvoting. I then sub or block after that point.
That is how I notice spammed slop as part of blocking a community. No, I won't be going back to remove down votes before blocking just because the community is about spamming slop and the posts fit the sub. Harm isn't a down voting requirement.
Those rules might not be unwritten depending on the community and/or instance the post is on.
I don't personally disagree with voting however you want to while browsing, it's just intentionally continuing to downvote a user or community when you could have blocked and moved on that I object to
Sure, go for it. I literally do not care how people use single accounts to vote on any topic.
When they use multiple accounts, yeah that is clearly terrible because they are artificially inflating their votes.
Weird thread to be commenting on if you literally don't care but you do you!
I personally think this sort of stuff helps keep the fediverse from being awesome but you do you!
I care about voting freely, not the actual vote results.
I upvote a shit ton of stuff which makes it more visible. That helps the fediverse. The shitty posts and comments that I downvote are what I see keeping the fediverse from being awesome.
Except, and I'm stunned this is a surprise to some but here we are, not everyone agrees on what's awesome and what's shitty.
So, in OP's case, the people who come here to talk about the nintendo games and then decide to take the plunge and post something are met with downvotes for having the audacity to post in a harmless community that others don't like.
It's lame and makes the fediverse less fun for folks, which is poison for somewhere that depends on network effects.
List of votes for spankmonkey@lemmy.world:
Total post upvotes/downvotes: 38206/883 [39089] 97.74% upvoted
Total comment upvotes/downvotes: 90499/9089 [99588] 90.87% upvoted
List of votes for mybrainhurts@lemmy.ca:
Total post upvotes/downvotes: 5591/171 [5752] 97.20% upvoted
Total comment upvotes: 1081/179 [1341] 80.61% upvoted
Maybe you shouldn't be down voting so much?
What does this have to do with what I wrote?
You said, as a response to me saying that people should be able to vote how they want.
I personally think this sort of stuff helps keep the fediverse from being awesome but you do you!
Yes, and?
Edit: is your position now that any and all down votes are bad for the fediverse?
I've had to remove the person your talking to from several communities for always downvoting the content, they don't hate everything, but the things they hate they love to hate.
Their philosophy, suppress the things you don't like, doesn't scale to a general population. For every topic there will be people who don't like it. So if everybody can suppress everybody else, everybody suppressed, participation is chilled, lemmy dies.
You are making my brain hurt.
A basic question about your position hurts your brain? Really?
Though, given that more than a few moderators have chimed in, I can see why.
Jet has an automated removal bot that will nuke someone for a single down vote. Their opinion is worthless because their moderation is dog shit.
Your question made my brain hurt because I had no idea how you think my opinion did a 180 because I pointed out that you don't practice what you preach.
Jet has an automated removal bot that will nuke someone for a single down vote. Their opinion is worthless because their moderation is dog shit.
Not actually true, there is nuance there: https://hackertalks.com/post/13655318
But hey, everybody makes mistakes including me, would you like to participate in those communities? If I unban you would you positively engage?
I pointed out that you don’t practice what you preach.
That's uhhhh, an interesting conclusion.
How do you mean? Have you decided that this simple thought:
But the downside is that people then upvote or downvote based on their preferences, not the community’s.
somehow secretly also means "don't ever downvote" ?

I'm still so curious about how you decided that this simple thought:
But the downside is that people then upvote or downvote based on their preferences, not the community’s.
somehow secretly also means “don’t ever downvote” ?
I can't explain something you made up.
My opinion is that people should vote however they want becsuse it does not hurt the fediverse, as long as each person votes once. That includes downvoting.
I didn't make this up, you wrote:
I pointed out that you don’t practice what you preach.
And I'm **still **baffled as to how you've come to that conclusion. The only thing you've shared is that ~20% of my votes are downvotes? Which somehow you've decided goes against this simple thought:
But the downside is that people then upvote or downvote based on their preferences, not the community’s.
So, what on Earth are you talking about?
Edit: Or, you could do the normal adult thing and just say "oh, my bad, I got confused as to whom I was responding" or "my mistake, I misread what you wrote and kind of dug in there" etc. Honestly, admitting you've made a mistake isn't a sign of weakness or stupidity, it's a sign of being a functional adult. (A valuable lesson to learn well.)
You are saying down voting is bad, yet you down vote more than me. You are a hypocrite, but I was trying to avoid saying it directly since people get butthurt about that kind of thing.
That is what I said, but apparently you can't read and thought me pointing out your hypocrisy meant my view changed.
Go upvote more stuff and improve the fediverse.
Upvotes/downvotes are unfortunately a fundamentally flawed concept. They originally served as an superior alternative to forums' previous sorting method of most-recently commented, but they are far from flawless themselves.
My ideal alternative would be some kind of customisable sort order chosen by the user that uses some kind of sentiment analysis of the text to find the kind of posts the user is interested in. For example, you could sort by whether post look serious or joking, how long they are, ratio of words to hyperlinks, etc. Could also filter out ragebait and similar rubbish.
Of course I can see downsides - performance considerations, and it would only work for text posts and comments, but it's just an idea off the top of my head.
Yes. It takes real restraint for me not to reflexively downvote news I don't like, or posts that makes me cringe but they're legitimate for the topic at hand. Also sometimes I downvote by accident without realizing.
Asking why things are downvoted or complaining about them are the two most surefire ways to receive plenty of them on the Threadiverse.
Upvotes or downvotes aren't worth anything, don't take it personally if you get downvoted. I've said unpopular stuff too and received downvotes. Once I wrote a raunchy joke and the votes on it went (1 -> 0-> 3 -> -5 -> 6 -> 20)
I still think downvotes (and upvotes!) should count for more when they come from subscribers. At least for sorting within the community
I worked at a site with a karma system years before reddit and the like ever came into being. There will always be people who just downvote anything they don't like. Unless you start finding and removing those users, nothing is going to change with them. And if you start removing chunks of your community, you have fewer posters, less interaction, etc.
Can't they just block the communities?
Already 2 steps ahead, 3 steps backwards, and 2 forwards. If one shows up on the "all" feed, I block it. Ain't much left AFAIK.
It's best for me to block them rather than just downvote a random post purely based on the community it's in.
Why care? There is no karma system. Just move on
Avoid „default” communities and instances, they tend to bring the worst of Reddit to Threadiverse. It’s slightly less of an issue if you stick to places that try to be different. You won’t avoid drive-by downvotes from /all but I don’t think it’s that much of an issue (there’s just too much crap there for anyone to browse it by time of posting).
Not just fediverse, I think any site that allows "downvotes" has this issue.
Personally, I don't see why the ability to downvote needs to exist. If someone is trolling, ignore it or report it. A troll post with a score of 1 and no comments is better than one with a score of -100 and no comments. The downvotes probably encourages the troll. They know they've upset a bunch of people. All their posts getting no interaction will bore them.
On the other hand, downvotes existing leads to things being hated on for no reason. Someone on asklemmy asks what your favourite pizza topping is and the top comment is pepperoni with a score of 100 and bottom is sardines with a score of -50. You see that and think nobody likes sardines. But what if taking away downvotes changes the scores to 100 pepperoni and 12 sardines. Now sardines isn't looking so bad even though the number of people who like it hasn't changed. What does the downvoting add? It just makes the people who like sardines feel bad. They might end up not contributing in the future and then every answer to asklemmy ends up being identical.
If we’re using votes to rank content then downvotes are redundant because now you have to upvote „right” stuff and downvote „wrong” stuff. Assuming everyone is waging the same kind of information warfare then downvotes won’t anything… but we’re not. Those that downvote willy nilly just want to have more say in things than others who don’t have energy to religiously clean website from „wrong” content. You’re not responsible for safeguarding users from „wrong” content unless you’re reporting rule breaking one. If you don’t like what’s being said but it doesn’t break rules then reply and explain why is it wrong, let others upvote if they agree.
Tildes solved this already. They have regular upvotes and they have labels for offtopic/noise/malice. Being able to use labels is reserved to users with good standing and can be applied once only. Noise downranks things without removing them, malice is essentially same as reporting them. Notably, there is no label for „wrong”.
Downvotes are useful to make bad content sink. Without them, the bad content has the exact same score as fresh new content, content that failed the Fluff Principle, etc
I don't see how downvotes help filter content. It makes sense at first, but either people are sorting content by New, in which case votes do not matter, or they are sorting by Top and will get only the "good" content. Several instances already have downvotes disabled. I don't see any complaints from their users about "bad" content having the same scores as "good" content.
lemmynsfw had to disable downvotes because gay content posted in gay communities was being downvoted. It wasn't being downvoted for quality, but for not being what the majority of users wanted to see. That doesn't mean all users now have to see gay content they don't like because they can't downvote it. It's still easy to filter using the block feature. Again, I've never seen users there complaining about being unable to filter good from bad because they can't downvote.
if you don't reduce its visibility, some clueless muppet is bound to interact with it, usually generating more bad content.
I've seen posts and comments with -100 votes often get lots of interaction from people who can't stop themselves from arguing with a troll. Sometimes there's only 1 or 2 comments under a post so the score doesn't even change its visibility at all.
Either way, giving people way to say "I disagree!" without interfering on the main purpose of the button - sorting content.
The way to say "I disagree!" is with the reply button! Votes don't prove who is right and who is wrong. I've never changed my opinion because of downvotes. Sometimes I even agree with a downvoted comment because I form my opinion based on arguments, not votes.
I also like seeing different opinions. Yours gave me a lot to think about! It'd be a shame if people didn't post their thoughts because they feared being downvoted for it.
Sadly... yes.
Some people feel like (I would say "think" but that seems not entirely accurate:-P) their preferences are the only ones that should matter, and that their right to "speak" should triumph over ("trump"?) your right to not have to listen. Entirely without the slightest hint of awareness as to the irony that they are supporting the very right-wing fascist ideologies that they claim to be against!! (I have taken to calling these the "Alt-Left", since they act identically to the USA "Alt-Right" that uses "alternative facts" in lieu of real ones as the basis for their belief structures). e.g. if they do not like a certain book then it is not sufficient for them to simply never read it - instead, everyone else must be denied the opportunity to access it as well, regardless of the circumstances you may find yourself in (being required to read it as part of a college course, seeking a well-balanced viewpoint by examining all sides of an issue, even highly negative ones?).
See also the phenomenon of "Eternal September". When people who act like children - of whatever physical age - flood the room, it becomes impossible for adults to have any kind of rational conversation. Put another way: respect is not something to be expected on the internet. When they go low... well, you have no choice but to take it and like it! Or you can leave.
No seriously: if you can move to a PieFed community, that would provide the only realistic solution I can think of to that problem that you are describing. Lemmy provides none (well, there is one but it is enormously extreme: it would involve making a community visible only to people on the same instance as wherever it is located, blocking out the entire rest of the Fediverse by default and forcing people to have accounts on every instance that chose to do this, thereby invalidating the entire concept of federation itself; although note the concept itself has merit for narrowly discussing certain instance-specific matters where outside opinions are neither appropriate nor welcomed, at the behest of the instance owner + admins) - and I doubt that it ever will, given how far behind Lemmy is in terms of features and how slowly those are added (it uses the very difficult to learn Rust coding language), plus the authoritarian biases present in the current set of its developers (who seem to prefer an admin dealing with such at the instance level rather than granting that power to anyone below the admin level). However, PieFed allows communities to receive votes only from people who have actually subscribed to that exact community - others can view the content, but only if they click the subscribe button can they interact with it to sway its visibility in that manner.
Yes, I am saying that PieFed might very well legitimately "save" the very concept of threaded social media, preventing it from being abandoned entirely by those of us who cannot stand the screaming cries of toddlers fucking literally fucking every fucking single fucking place that we fucking go. I would rather go read a book that I checked out from a library and never visit the Threadiverse again if I could not find such hope that no, somebody else's preferences do not get to dictate literally every tiny aspect of life that we all are allowed to live, which does not sound the tiniest bit like "freedom" to me.
Though I admit that I may be too overly sensitive right now to the absolute tidal wave of emotional vomiting that goes on across the Threadiverse (I live in America where the "will of the people" is leading to ah... uh... "big changes" as of late, so sadly I am losing hope that the masses always know what is "best" at all times - especially when not articulated in a well-reasoned rebuttal but merely delivered as a drive-by downvoting spree).

Not made by me, but excellent oc by another lemmite https://startrek.website/post/27897300
I'm on Beehaw. I don't see down votes. Blissful ignorance.
I don't think you're wrong about the tradeoffs, I just think the tradeoff is worth it.
What if all votes were hidden? You could still press the buttons and it would affect the sorting, but nobody sees the number.
Votes are public as far as the API is concerned and there are tools to show you who voted in what way.
making them unavailable by the API instead.
Votes are available via the API. There is a setting to limit it to your local instance. By default, they federate.
It's been around for a while, I don't remember the dates
Basically, this is what it looks like

If you're modding a small community trying to get off the ground and you're suffering from downvoters who aren't participants in your comm, ban the downvoters.
Edit: Hilarious that I got downvoted by an account with 0 comments
You have two downvoters, probably the same person
flyingsquirrel a sockpuppet with 0 comment / 0 posts
https://lemvotes.org/user/flyingsquirrel@lemmy.dbzer0.com
nothis a vote manipulation account with 0 comment / 0 posts
someone I've had to remove from my communities https://lemvotes.org/user/nothis@sh.itjust.works
Probably a real person's main account, but just really combative with nothing to say
That's typical reddit behavior, many of them brought their childish habits over to the fediverse.

top 92 comments