By default, Lemmy allows downvotes globally. However, when a server disables downvoting, it is similar to using a feature that is usually reserved for enterprises and very small, non-federated communities.

If a user prefer to not see downvotes, they can disable it by his favourite client settings, but the rest of the community should not miss this functionality for the pleasure of few users.

  • Lvxferre@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    19 hours ago

    The problem with downvotes in LemmyNSFW was very specific to that instance and its sexual nature. It boils down to the typical user doing the following:

    • people use downvotes to signal “I don’t want to see this”
    • most people want to see naked women, not naked men
    • the instance is supposed to be inclusive towards people who want to see either

    As a result, content geared towards gay+bi men, hetero+bi women, and plenty non-binary people was consistently downvoted - and it was discouraging genuine OC for those demographics.

    It was totally a band-aid measure, mind you. But it kind of worked?

    An actual solution for that issue would be to require people to tag their content, and allow posters to pick what they want to see based on those tags. But for that you’d need further improvement of the software.

      • Lvxferre@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        15 hours ago

        They do, but once you hop into the “local” view you see all of those posts. And the users, instead of blocking those communities as “content that is not relevant for me, but might be for someone else”, simply downvote the posts as a knee-jerk reaction.

        (Yup, communities. I typically shorten it to comms.)

    • muntedcrocodile@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Supply demand is king either ignore the downvotes or find a new target market. I dont recon its worked at all its just means people will block the accounts meaning they are memory holed perminantly.

      • Lvxferre@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        15 hours ago

        Supply demand is king

        No, it is not. Smithsonian economics don’t even work here, due to the network effect causing a vicious cycle: less visibility due to downvotes → lower perceived supply → users look for that content outside Lemmy → less demand for that content → lower actual supply.

        And in this case it’s really bad, because Lemmy is supposed to be welcoming to gay people too, not just heterosexual men like me.

        I dont recon its worked at all its just means people will block the accounts meaning they are memory holed perminantly.

        They block the communities instead, as it’s easier than blocking individual posters. And, frankly, it’s a better approach than downvoting the content as it discourages it from being shared.

        • muntedcrocodile@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Lemmy is the ultimate embodiment of a free market. U dont think thats even a valid argument if that content is downvoted communities dedicated to it will be equally downvoted. Welcoming should not mean making the experience for the majority significantly worse simply to avoid a minority having to search a little harder.

          Blocking communities doesnt work entirely since u end up with fat chicks and dicks in communities that arent specificly dedicated to either.