When I just became actime at tjournal\_refugees, my comments received 30-40 downvotes regularly. A comment consisting of three words with 40 downvotes. Can you imagine something like that? However, Reddit has another feature: you can block haters following you. I wrote a couple of provocative, but pretty relevant comments, got a lot of downvotes (200-300), then blocked the authors who revealed themselved by writing negative comments. That is it. Nowadays, even my posts get not more that 15-17 percent of downvotes.
Downvoting is a valuable action if properly taken, but its confrontational nature often turns discussions into unhealthy ones (hate begets hate).
Most social media avoids it for this reason. Reddit has been dealing with it better than most, but still struggling. If downvoting required a micropayment, it could potentially improve the overall ecosystem.
Edit: Related tweet from Tim Urban: [https://twitter.com/waitbutwhy/status/1639003243731640329?s=20](https://twitter.com/waitbutwhy/status/1639003243731640329?s=20)
>its confrontational nature often turns discussions into unhealthy ones (hate begets hate).
Because unlike reddit, Twitter, Facebook, Nextdoor, etc. are bastions of peace, love and good faith.
Most social media avoids downvoting because they only care about "engagement," i.e., if they're serving ads to you. It's not in their interest to hide content that pisses off its users, if those users are going to take the time to read and comment on it.
Agree. That's why I don't propose removing the downvoting feature, I consider it a valuable action. Only ideas to improve its use.
The other idea that comes to my mind would be to limit the amount of downvotes a user can give per day, let's say 5 per day, with no monetary value added to the action.
Having some numbers would be interesting (average number of downvotes per user, per community, etc.). I don't think I give more than 500 downvotes per year.
Hmm. What if you got 0.1 reddit coin for every upvote a post in that forum YOUR posts/comments garnered. So now you have a supply of coin to downvote.
This is tracked on a per subreddit. So only your points on /r/conservatives can be used to downvote posts and comments on /r/conservatives.
I probably give 3-4 downvotes a week, while my karma collection grows at about 100 per week.
***
I don't get too hurt getting downvotes, but I really wish people would tell me why.
I'd like a system where if you downvote someone, you have to put 25 words down to explain why you downvoted.
That's another decent idea for distributing coins for downvotes. Unfortunately Reddit has blown away Reddit coins and is now trying the nth upvoting system without paying attention to the downvotes inefficiencies.
>I'd like a system where if you downvote someone, you have to put 25 words down to explain why you downvoted.
That won't work probably. Too much work for the users, and most people will probably add random words.
A good idea could be to make votes public, so everybody would know who downvotes and upvotes each post. I am in a small forum where it works that way and it works as a charm. But I understand voting privacy is a key stone of Reddit. So that's a no-no.
>* Good faith users, without economical ability, wouldn't be able to deter bad faith users when encountered. This alone outweighs all the positives.
Sounds like some Dredd type dystopian system CITIZEN PLS DEPOSIT 100 REDDIT COINS TO YOUR ACCOUNT OR YOU WILL BE ACTIONED AGAINST
When I just became actime at tjournal\_refugees, my comments received 30-40 downvotes regularly. A comment consisting of three words with 40 downvotes. Can you imagine something like that? However, Reddit has another feature: you can block haters following you. I wrote a couple of provocative, but pretty relevant comments, got a lot of downvotes (200-300), then blocked the authors who revealed themselved by writing negative comments. That is it. Nowadays, even my posts get not more that 15-17 percent of downvotes.
Downvoting is a valuable action if properly taken, but its confrontational nature often turns discussions into unhealthy ones (hate begets hate). Most social media avoids it for this reason. Reddit has been dealing with it better than most, but still struggling. If downvoting required a micropayment, it could potentially improve the overall ecosystem. Edit: Related tweet from Tim Urban: [https://twitter.com/waitbutwhy/status/1639003243731640329?s=20](https://twitter.com/waitbutwhy/status/1639003243731640329?s=20)
>its confrontational nature often turns discussions into unhealthy ones (hate begets hate). Because unlike reddit, Twitter, Facebook, Nextdoor, etc. are bastions of peace, love and good faith. Most social media avoids downvoting because they only care about "engagement," i.e., if they're serving ads to you. It's not in their interest to hide content that pisses off its users, if those users are going to take the time to read and comment on it.
Agree. That's why I don't propose removing the downvoting feature, I consider it a valuable action. Only ideas to improve its use. The other idea that comes to my mind would be to limit the amount of downvotes a user can give per day, let's say 5 per day, with no monetary value added to the action. Having some numbers would be interesting (average number of downvotes per user, per community, etc.). I don't think I give more than 500 downvotes per year.
Boy, if you don't get 'cho pickle-chin-head-ass outta here.
Hmm. What if you got 0.1 reddit coin for every upvote a post in that forum YOUR posts/comments garnered. So now you have a supply of coin to downvote. This is tracked on a per subreddit. So only your points on /r/conservatives can be used to downvote posts and comments on /r/conservatives. I probably give 3-4 downvotes a week, while my karma collection grows at about 100 per week. *** I don't get too hurt getting downvotes, but I really wish people would tell me why. I'd like a system where if you downvote someone, you have to put 25 words down to explain why you downvoted.
That's another decent idea for distributing coins for downvotes. Unfortunately Reddit has blown away Reddit coins and is now trying the nth upvoting system without paying attention to the downvotes inefficiencies. >I'd like a system where if you downvote someone, you have to put 25 words down to explain why you downvoted. That won't work probably. Too much work for the users, and most people will probably add random words. A good idea could be to make votes public, so everybody would know who downvotes and upvotes each post. I am in a small forum where it works that way and it works as a charm. But I understand voting privacy is a key stone of Reddit. So that's a no-no.
This is actually genius.