this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2023
95 points (77.5% liked)

Asklemmy

43393 readers
1320 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
95
Do you think the Internet and websites with 'voting' systems encourage hivemind thinking and discourage any debate or discourse? Solutions? (discuss.tchncs.de)
submitted 11 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
63 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I 'upvote' more or less all posts I interact with (sometimes I forget to vote). I feel like we should bring back open dialogues and heavily dissuade people from simply disregarding someone's entire belief system or ideals based on 200 characters of text (an example).

Think about one person in your life who you first thought was a complete asshole and once you got to know them they were pretty cool, maybe you became best friends with them. The point is, judging a person based on a minute snippet in time is a fool's errand, and your own state of mind contributes a lot to your own judgement of people. Your next thought might be, well they have a history of x, y AND z, so they deserve every bit of judgement coming their way! I would ask you, why? Are you not simply fueling further hatred, vitriol and division? So instead of stopping for a moment and thinking about the world from someone else's perspective, you'd rather just spit out some more hatred and move on like that person doesn't exist?

I would love to see some solution to the shitty state of the Internet. I only say Internet because for the most part this doesn't happen in real life in my experience. I think it has to do with consequences and social sigma and so on. I reckon it would be pretty awesome if there was something like the following:

  • all upvotes are free range, people can give out upvotes like they were candy
  • downvotes come at a "cost", whereby if you want to downvote someone you have to reply directly to them with some justification, say minimum number of characters, words, etc.

In an ideal world, and setup, this would help raise positivity in the world and have people at the very least have a second thought before being negative.

Yes I understand there would be flaws, I've worked with and used computers for a long time, I know. I chose not to delve deep into those as I feel that would defeat the purpose of the message I'm trying to convey. And, you know, lead by example.

What do ya'll think? Any suggestions to boost positivity in the world, I'm all ears, smash them and any other thoughts in the comments.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 9 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Wouldn't nerving downvotes/dislikes make it harder to voice your option freely? It's the easiest way to signal if you dislike something (And ofc the other way around with upvotes). But if you make it harder to do that, you'll suddenly have a lot of people that just don't bother. That will create a false sense of acceptance of whatever has been said and will make it easier to create echo chambers.

[โ€“] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

But isn't it ambiguous what a downvote means? Did they not think it was relevant, did they not like the opinion, the tone, the style of phrasing, etc. etc.? Or are they saying you're factually wrong (which is also another way it gets used)? Also a downvote may not be interpreted in the same way that the downvoter intended. I think it's better that people just say what they think.

Also, if they can't be bothered to properly express their opinion, is it really that important? I think the default sense is indifference not acceptance. Anecdotally speaking I've observed that echo chambers have only got worse since voting has become a thing.

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Couldn't that be said about upvotes as well?

Also: Nobody owes anyone anything and that also goes for explainations on up- or downvotes.

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I think the same could be said for upvotes as well - I remember the days before upvotes or "likes" were a thing and I don't think their invention ever really improved anything. I'm mostly talking about downvotes because that's what the topic is about, and maybe they are more likely to contribute to a negative atmosphere.

Yes, nobody owes any kind of response, but if you're using it as a form of communication why wouldn't you want to make sure you're understood in the way you intended?

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

But there's there's already a way to clarify what your downvote means by just writing an additional comment.

But maybe someone doesn't want to clarify because they feel like it's not worth their time. Or maybe they disagree with everything and don't know where to start. Or maybe the just want to say "I don't like that" and that's it.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Conversations are a two-way process requiring effort from both sides to work well. If they feel like it's not worth their time I would rather they just didn't engage in the first place. Like you said they're not owed a response, that also means you don't have to give one.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

But what If I don't want to have a conversation? Sometimes I just want to signal to someone that I don't like what they posted.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

That's quite a negative interaction though isn't it? Can you think of a real life equivalent expression of a drive-by downvote that wouldn't be considered rude?

Also, why do you think they would care what you think if you're not going to engage more? If I have a comment that gets lots of downvotes and no other engagement, it's hardly going to change my view, all I'll think is "people around here aren't very friendly". I think it just contributes to a hostile atmosphere online (and don't get me wrong, I've been guilty of doing it too).

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Can you think of a real life equivalent expression of a drive-by downvote that wouldn't be considered rude?

I don't think downvoting a post without an explanation is rude. It's the most basic way of saying: "I don't like this".

But to answer your question: Literally showing someone a thumbs-down.

Also, why do you think they would care what you think if you're not going to engage more?

They should feel free to ignore Downvotes then (or disable them in their client)

it's hardly going to change my view

Of courses it won't, but I don't care. If I cared I'd write a comment.

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I think the equivalent would be walking up to someone who's talking, telling them to "shut up", and walking off without explanation (let's say this is at at a setting like a party where you're invited to interact but are under no obligation to).