Skip Navigation

Should Lemmy hide downvotes on your own posts by default?

There is a pull request which adds a new setting show_downvotes with these settings:

  • Show (current behaviour)
  • Hide (all downvotes hidden in ui)
  • ShowForOthers (only downvotes on other user's posts are visible)

Importantly the last option would become the new default, which means that users wont be aware that their post or comment was downvoted unless they manually change the setting. This may be good for mental health, but may also make it harder for users to realize that their content is unpopular. What do you think about it?

Here is the pull request

53 comments
  • Based on the feedback here, I've changed the PR to have Show be the default, and its been merged.

    ShowForOthers is still an option, just not the default.

  • Absolutely not. Sometimes you say something stupid, and people make you feel bad about it. That's healthy, that's good.

    Sometimes you say something unpopular but correct... You need to recognize that it's unpopular, and learn to package the idea in a more palatable way or approach the topic less directly.

    You should feel bad for rage baiting... Even if you're unambigiously right, you need to read the room and meet people where they are if you want to change minds. You don't need to change your views, but you need to adapt your framing or you're just rilling people up

    Negative social responses are a good thing, it's required for a community. Social rejection hurts so bad because we so rarely feel it, and that's sickness. Most people can have few or no negative interactions, because when money is involved, people will smile and take your money

    It's such a little thing, but it's a very gentle form of rejection... Avoiding it is not good, and so from a public health perspective we should default to showing it

  • I'd rather it be transparent, or non-existent. Hexbear is nice, it has no downvotes, but some users like the ability to downvote for other instances. I think it could be on an instance to decide to implement it, but not for the "flagship" instance. Though, I'd prefer it be put to a vote. I think it has use cases for sure.

  • IMO framing this as a way to protect the feelings of the poster sets us up to debate how people should react to downvotes. That was my initial reaction, anyway. It's not a productive discussion, too much judgement.

    But there are heaps of other good reasons why you might want to just show a single number (upvotes minus downvotes), for everyone, not just when viewing one's own content.

    • cleaner, less cluttered UI
    • simpler code?
    • people don't need to know how many downvotes a comment got (their own comments OR other people's), all that really matters is the aggregate score

    Reddit and PieFed both just show one number - the score - and it works fine. On PieFed you can hover your mouse over the score to get a tooltip that breaks it down into up and down but afaik no one cares.


    If other people can see that I got downvoted a lot but I can't then every little snarky comment about how many downvotes I'm getting is going to trigger extreme FOMO and the urge to turn the downvote hiding feature off. An unknown amount of downvotes is worse than knowing how many downvotes there are.

  • I think disabling downvotes totally for the user's content by default would be a bad idea, because it is important for a user to know if what they are saying is unpopular.

    Here's an approach I have taken for my app (for all posts and comments).

    • If downvotes are <= 5, downvotes show as 0.
    • If downvotes <= 5%, downvotes show as 0.

    Remember, the reasoning for this is a mere hypothesis and not results obtained from an experiment.

    The 5 percent rule aims to prevent fringe opinions from downvoting. This solves issues like, "why do I have 3 downvotes on a picture of my cute puppy?".

    The 5 downvotes rule prevents downvoting bias. I have observed this happening on Reddit a lot. If a comment has 3 upvotes and 2 downvotes, people tend to downvote more (just because of the downvote counts and not the content itself). 2 downvotes in a 5 total votes sample size is too small to make any decision about the quality of content.

    In my opinion, cases like these are where the downvotes serve more as a mental health destroyer rather than decentralised content moderation.

    So to answer your question, I think having the current as default would be better, I.e., option "Show". However, if you're open to refine this even further, I would suggest the 5-5% idea.

  • To elaborate on why I'd like to add this, from the original issue:

    This is to enable a user being able to still show downvotes for other people's posts/comments, but hide downvotes to their own content.

    Adding this exception for your user alone, is to promote a positive experience, and for users to not have their mental well-being negatively affected by downvotes to their own content.

    To mitigate the mental health negatives of downvotes, many instances already have downvotes entirely removed (meaning not only are downvotes not shown, but its impossible to downvote anything).

    Disabling downvotes globally (not just for your user), has a lot of negatives, such as:

    • Highly negative / low score comments seem to still be upvoted, and so encourage twitter-style rage-bait engagement (instead of just downvoting and moving on).
    • These combative threads then keep getting bumped to the top of the active sort, making hostile comments seem the norm.
    • You don't know which comments are actually unpopular or not, so like twitter, you have to "check the ratio", of replies to upvotes, to see if something is actually unpopular.

    By making ShowForOthers default, we mitigate the downsides above, while also promoting positive mental health.

    Just to clarify:

    • This is not removing the ability to downvote.
    • This is only about adding a setting to hide downvotes to your own content.
    • Users can always re-enable showing downvotes to their own content at any time in their settings.
    • I get why you want to add the option, but why are you proposing to change everyone’s settings by changing the default on something almost nobody changes?

      If you insist this is a better default, at least have the courtesy to only change the default for new users, and ensure any DB migrations don’t change existing users’ settings.

  • Fudging data to protect feelings of bad posters is how you get more bad posters.

  • I have to say I really appreciate not seeing downvotes when I am on hexbear I think they got a good thing going on over there.

  • As others have said, I think it should be opt in instead of opt out, but it is probably good to have as an option.

    However, if the intent is to improve mental health - I would recommend making it an option to hide all votes in their entirety. One can hide their down votes, but that may just change some peoples perspective from "high number of down votes" to "low number of up votes" which to them may be functionally the same as far as mental health is concerned. Therefore I think that it would be good to have the option for each/both.

    For me this would have another benefit as well - it would allow me to think about and respond to all content in a more objective and honest manner.

  • I'm not sure there's a purpose to it the way things are clustered here. Particular for anything of a political/news nature the very same post on one instance and com may get a completely different reaction on another. There are a fair number of people that I think of as 'fire and forget posters' in that they simply fire off posts but rarely interact with them after. Making this the default would likely encourage more of the same behavior, possibly leading to more spam.

    • How would it encourage the behavior? If they fire and forget, they aren't looking at downvotes anyway.

      • More a speculative thought, but if those who do pay attention to negative feedback no longer see any, they may not take that into consideration when they put things up.

        Say someone put up a post, saw no backlash on the front end, but then comes to look at the responses and sees a cesspit of hate. That's hardly going to soften any mental harms it might otherwise impose.

        Another thought here is messing about with such things, particularly in making them a default behavior, could disrupt comms where there is a strong voting aspect to it. The 'am I the asshole' type place that, despite the usual attempt to have them adjudicated by some nuanced comment system, inevitably end up using votes as a agree/disagree dynamic.

53 comments