That’s not really the question either. The question is “why do we have a downvote button/what do we hope it accomplishes?”
If your goal is to have an agree/disagree binary to sort all content, then power to you because that is how it is used. But a lot of people, not just myself, don’t want that.
I disagree with “that is how it will be used” because that is not the only way people use it. Self-moderation is more of a pro than agree/disagree is a con.
I think we disagree on 1. I think we need them for signaling what is acceptable and what is unacceptable, but you do not think this is necessary
2. We disagree on this, with me thinking that it is used enough to be useful and you thinking it is not.
3. We disagree on this as well: I don’t think it’s sustainable or healthy for mods to shoulder this burden alone in a reddit-style format. Exceptions being perhaps ask-historians who have a very hardworking (volunteer) team and a very niche focus.
Now to make the strongest counter argument against myself: I’ve been to some popular subreddits where some awful things are upvoted a lot, and contrary takes are downvoted. But even this is not too bad because it just signals to me that I don’t want to be part of that community, and find somewhere that’s more in alignment with how I want voting to be used.
To make the argument for downvoting, on other subreddits I’ve seen comments with -10, and when I open them I see they were trolling/abuse or something, and it confirms my confidence in that community that the overwhelming majority of people do not want to allow that comment, vs just one mod minimizing it, or removing it completely.
That’s not really the question either. The question is “why do we have a downvote button/what do we hope it accomplishes?”
If your goal is to have an agree/disagree binary to sort all content, then power to you because that is how it is used. But a lot of people, not just myself, don’t want that.
I disagree with “that is how it will be used” because that is not the only way people use it. Self-moderation is more of a pro than agree/disagree is a con.
Self moderation clearly isn’t working if you ask me. Otherwise we wouldn’t have mods in the first place.
I also didn’t say it was the exclusive usage but it’s certainly the dominant one.
I’m not sure how you draw that conclusion. It’s not either or, you have downvoting and mods working together
Let’s kind of refocus here because there are 3 things at play.
1: What do you think we need downvotes for, 2: do you think that’s how they’re being used, and 3: are there better tools to accomplish #1?
After that it’s an assessment of other potential cons.
I think we disagree on 1. I think we need them for signaling what is acceptable and what is unacceptable, but you do not think this is necessary 2. We disagree on this, with me thinking that it is used enough to be useful and you thinking it is not. 3. We disagree on this as well: I don’t think it’s sustainable or healthy for mods to shoulder this burden alone in a reddit-style format. Exceptions being perhaps ask-historians who have a very hardworking (volunteer) team and a very niche focus.
Now to make the strongest counter argument against myself: I’ve been to some popular subreddits where some awful things are upvoted a lot, and contrary takes are downvoted. But even this is not too bad because it just signals to me that I don’t want to be part of that community, and find somewhere that’s more in alignment with how I want voting to be used.
To make the argument for downvoting, on other subreddits I’ve seen comments with -10, and when I open them I see they were trolling/abuse or something, and it confirms my confidence in that community that the overwhelming majority of people do not want to allow that comment, vs just one mod minimizing it, or removing it completely.
Let me know what your think