Trump has frankly gotten embarrassed at every debate he's done, but the media handicaps him so hard that the narrative ends up being about everything his opponent does. So of course he's going to do the debate. He's going to say bat shit crazy things, he's going to lie, he's going to be cringe as fuck and he'll probably say a bunch of racist and sexist things.
And the next day all the media will talk about is the time Harris sneezed or slightly mispronounced some word or some shit.
Certain major instances are way worse than reddit ever was.
To prevent them from engaging in bad behavior.
So you can still ban the voting agent. Worst case scenario you have to wait for a single rule breaking comment to ban the user. That seems like a small price to pay for a massive privacy enhancement.
I don't think you do. Admins can just ban the voting agent for bad voting behavior and the user for bad posting behavior. All of this conflict is imagined.
This is literally already the Lemmy trust model. I can easily just spin up my own instance and send out fake pub actions to brigade. The method detecting and resolving this is no different.
It will be extremely obvious if you see 300 user agents voting but the instance only has 100 active users.
But if the only bad behavior is voting and you can that agent then you've solved the core issue. The utility is to remove the bad behavior, no?
Is that really harassment considering Lemmy votes have no real consequences besides feels?
You don't even need to message an admin. You can just ban the agent doing the voting.
Ok, then you can keep your votes public and other who don't want that have an option as well. Everyone is happy. There is no conflict here.
It really isn't though. It is thermal noise.