I think people often use /all to browse, which makes sense for a fairly small site like Lemmy. But the downside is that people then upvote or downvote based on their preferences, not the community’s.
(Eg, the fellow below who has decided Apple and Nintendo are like Nazis and must always be downvoted.)
But the downside is that people then upvote or downvote based on their preferences, not the community’s.
This is only a downside for niche communites promoting positive topics like equality. Communities about for profit companies, that promote horrible ideas and people, etc are what downvotes are for.
If there was a community called “Nestlé is awesome” I would hope it gets downvoted into oblivion.
There are various philosophies about how fediverse participation should work. Some would say you should block a community you don’t like (but that is not harmful) rather than downvoting its posts (because downvoting is supposed to be a signal that the content doesn’t belong on the community where it’s posted)
Others vote on posts regardless of their communities, preferring to try to curate the fediverse at large rather than their own feeds
I think there’s an argument to be made though, that if you’re a person who browses the “all” feed rather than subscriptions or individual communities, that there’s a point where you should block a particular community you don’t want to see rather than continuously downvoting it. When the content isn’t harmful but you merely dislike it, it seems reasonable to expect the user to curate their experience at least a little.
There is also an argument that expecting everyone to agree with and follow the unwritten rules of ‘voting correctly’ is just a vocal minority trying to impose their will on all users.
Generally I limit to subs but browse All occasionally to find new communities. Part of this process is upvoting and down voting stuff and seeing which communities has more stuff I want and less stuff I thought was worth downvoting. I then sub or block after that point.
That is how I notice spammed slop as part of blocking a community. No, I won’t be going back to remove down votes before blocking just because the community is about spamming slop and the posts fit the sub. Harm isn’t a down voting requirement.
Those rules might not be unwritten depending on the community and/or instance the post is on.
I don’t personally disagree with voting however you want to while browsing, it’s just intentionally continuing to downvote a user or community when you could have blocked and moved on that I object to
I care about voting freely, not the actual vote results.
I upvote a shit ton of stuff which makes it more visible. That helps the fediverse. The shitty posts and comments that I downvote are what I see keeping the fediverse from being awesome.
Except, and I’m stunned this is a surprise to some but here we are, not everyone agrees on what’s awesome and what’s shitty.
So, in OP’s case, the people who come here to talk about the nintendo games and then decide to take the plunge and post something are met with downvotes for having the audacity to post in a harmless community that others don’t like.
It’s lame and makes the fediverse less fun for folks, which is poison for somewhere that depends on network effects.
I think people often use /all to browse, which makes sense for a fairly small site like Lemmy. But the downside is that people then upvote or downvote based on their preferences, not the community’s.
(Eg, the fellow below who has decided Apple and Nintendo are like Nazis and must always be downvoted.)
This is only a downside for niche communites promoting positive topics like equality. Communities about for profit companies, that promote horrible ideas and people, etc are what downvotes are for.
If there was a community called “Nestlé is awesome” I would hope it gets downvoted into oblivion.
I don’t like linux, should I downvote all linux stuff? Does that make the fediverse better?
There are various philosophies about how fediverse participation should work. Some would say you should block a community you don’t like (but that is not harmful) rather than downvoting its posts (because downvoting is supposed to be a signal that the content doesn’t belong on the community where it’s posted)
Others vote on posts regardless of their communities, preferring to try to curate the fediverse at large rather than their own feeds
In my opinion, it is presumptuous and arrogant to attempt to curate the fediverse at large according to one’s own preferences.
Piefed has the answer:
It is arrogant to think the context of a community overrides anyone’s personal preferences on how to interact with the voting system.
I think there’s an argument to be made though, that if you’re a person who browses the “all” feed rather than subscriptions or individual communities, that there’s a point where you should block a particular community you don’t want to see rather than continuously downvoting it. When the content isn’t harmful but you merely dislike it, it seems reasonable to expect the user to curate their experience at least a little.
There is also an argument that expecting everyone to agree with and follow the unwritten rules of ‘voting correctly’ is just a vocal minority trying to impose their will on all users.
Generally I limit to subs but browse All occasionally to find new communities. Part of this process is upvoting and down voting stuff and seeing which communities has more stuff I want and less stuff I thought was worth downvoting. I then sub or block after that point.
That is how I notice spammed slop as part of blocking a community. No, I won’t be going back to remove down votes before blocking just because the community is about spamming slop and the posts fit the sub. Harm isn’t a down voting requirement.
Those rules might not be unwritten depending on the community and/or instance the post is on.
I don’t personally disagree with voting however you want to while browsing, it’s just intentionally continuing to downvote a user or community when you could have blocked and moved on that I object to
Sure, go for it. I literally do not care how people use single accounts to vote on any topic.
When they use multiple accounts, yeah that is clearly terrible because they are artificially inflating their votes.
Weird thread to be commenting on if you literally don’t care but you do you!
I personally think this sort of stuff helps keep the fediverse from being awesome but you do you!
I care about voting freely, not the actual vote results.
I upvote a shit ton of stuff which makes it more visible. That helps the fediverse. The shitty posts and comments that I downvote are what I see keeping the fediverse from being awesome.
Except, and I’m stunned this is a surprise to some but here we are, not everyone agrees on what’s awesome and what’s shitty.
So, in OP’s case, the people who come here to talk about the nintendo games and then decide to take the plunge and post something are met with downvotes for having the audacity to post in a harmless community that others don’t like.
It’s lame and makes the fediverse less fun for folks, which is poison for somewhere that depends on network effects.
List of votes for spankmonkey@lemmy.world:
Total post upvotes/downvotes: 38206/883 [39089] 97.74% upvoted
Total comment upvotes/downvotes: 90499/9089 [99588] 90.87% upvoted
List of votes for mybrainhurts@lemmy.ca:
Total post upvotes/downvotes: 5591/171 [5752] 97.20% upvoted
Total comment upvotes: 1081/179 [1341] 80.61% upvoted
Maybe you shouldn’t be down voting so much?
What does this have to do with what I wrote?