• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    930 days ago

    Then again, private votes would be private for mods and admins too. So no more moderating vote brigading or downvote abuse or anything like that.

    • @IlovePizza
      link
      English
      230 days ago

      Good point. Would it be useful to somewhat anonymize them by giving every user a unique code? So admins would see these codes but not easily know what users they represent.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1130 days ago

        I’m afraid this may enable a malicious instance to use this mechanism to manipulate votes while making it much harder to detect. I think transparent voting is much preferable.

        • Iceblade
          link
          English
          429 days ago

          If we look at any of the big social media platforms with public votes, that has not prevented voting abuse through bots and the like. Rather it has served to fuel online harrassment campaigns and value of influential individuals votes (ooh Bill Gates liked X, Kamala Harris disliked Y etc.)

          Aggregating votes rather than having individually visible votes serves the purpose of shifting focus to how the community values of the content. It’s the same reason that we follow communities rather than people.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            329 days ago

            Vote aggregates would be insanely easy to maliciously manipulate. Also, the underlying protocol has no support for vote aggregates so this isn’t even an option in the first place.

            • Iceblade
              link
              English
              229 days ago

              Votes already are presented to the end user in an aggregated fashion, as opposed to how it is on kbin/mbin. In any case, even in the current implementation manipulation is relatively easy, as an admin can just spin up extra accounts. The fediverse relies on trust.