• Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      +80/-20 +50/-50 +20/-80 +1/-99 +100/-0

      Just from those vote counts, I can be pretty sure the first comment is insightful, the second controversial, the third a troll, and the fourth is definitely spam. The fifth is probably a cat pic, relevant xkcd, meme, or a single-sentence comment that everyone loves, but doesn’t actually add anything important to the topic. If I’m looking for an interesting conversation, I’m focused on the first two, maybe the third. If I’m looking to be pissed off, the third and fourth. And if I’m looking for an easy read, the fifth.

      +80, +50, +20, +1, and +100 doesn’t provide the same information. It’s the downvotes that provide the relative context.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          You can also be “downvoted into oblivion” if you’re 100%, objectively correct, but your conclusion goes against the “hive mind.” I have had comments with a ton of sources and detailed analysis that got downvoted like crazy, and then the top comment is like “X group, amirite?”

          You’re 100% correct that reddit rewards snark far more than constructive discussion. That’s part of why I’m here, and why I’ll probably be perennially disappointed with social media.

        • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I value the ability to view the community sentiment more than I value artificial manipulation of the voting system to make the community seem more fair and open minded than it actually is.

          When my opinion is not well received by the community, either I am wrong, or I have not presented it in a way they can understand and accept.

          “Downvoting to oblivion” is not an inherently bad thing, even when it is due to a mistake or misconception. Just because that particular conversation has ended and 99.9% of the traffic has passed through does not mean the topic is finished. It will come back up in the future, and I know I will need to focus on that mistake or misconception when it does.

          I also reject your characterization that upvotes are a “reward”.

            • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              For instance, r/conservative on Reddit famously bans

              That’s a moderation issue, not a community voting issue.

              The problem is that second part is incredibly broad. It can simply be because somebody didn’t like that you use a certain source, even if it’s completely valid.

              I disagree that this is a “problem”. Votes are opinions, not objective fact.

              There is a very specific zeitgeist/mentality there that must be adhered to, regardless of the quality of what you say. That is not a virtue, that is a problem.

              Again, that’s primarily a moderation issue, not a community voting issue. The moderators enforcing a zeitgeist is certainly a problem; the community, not nearly so much.

              For the community, it’s really only a problem if we assume upvotes are “good” and downvotes are “bad”. You have thus far completely ignored my point that the 80/20, 50/50, and even the 20/80 comment threads are consistently superior to the 100/0 threads. You need disagreement and conflict to have debate. Without the downvotes, you just have a weakly upvoted comment. With the downvotes, you have an immediate indication of a divisive position, ripe for a lively debate.

              • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                I disagree that this is a “problem”. Votes are opinions, not objective fact.

                So what is the desired end result of a voting system, to promote popular opinions, or to promote interesting opinions? Because as implemented, voting-based SM tends to promote the former, and I think many people prefer the latter.

                So to me, it is a problem because it’s not meeting the goals that presumably most people have.

                With the downvotes, you have an immediate indication of a divisive position, ripe for a lively debate.

                Many platforms, like Reddit, hide comments that get too many downvotes. So many people just won’t see the interesting, controversial discussion, and I think that’s a problem.

                We should be sorting based on likeliness of being interesting, not popularity.

                • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  So what is the desired end result of a voting system, to promote popular opinions, or to promote interesting opinions?

                  The voting system just presents the community opinion on the comment. There are any number of ways to weigh those opinions. The other metrics I would want to see are number of threads, average length of threads, average word count in replies, etc. But raw upvoted and downvote counts go a long way toward finding good content.

                  • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    It only really works in smaller communities imo, as the community gets larger, it just reflects what’s popular, and that’s a separate scale from good vs bad, especially once your community has self-selected itself into a common way of thinking.

                    So the question is, how do we mitigate that self selection? How do we promote diversity? Voting doesn’t seem to cut it, and I don’t think moderation is the way either (we just need the “right people” argument). So yeah, I’d like to see a lot more experimentation with different ways of sorting comments and posts, because I think promoting diverse content is better long term.

    • Serinus@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      it isn’t sorting by “contribute/doesn’t contribute,” that’s for sure.

      It’s both. You’re not wrong with the groupthink thing, but they absolutely do help to combat disinformation and useless comments. I get that you’ve made a decision, but you don’t need to rationalize away the negatives.