1y ago

What are your criteria for upvoting/downvoting?

I hate that I always compare Lemmy to Reddit, but Reddit used to have (not sure if they still do) guidelines called "Reddiquette" that included guidelines about upvoting and downvoting. I don't remember the specifics (and sending too much of my browser traffic to Reddit makes me feel dirty) but one of the guidelines was not to upvote/downvote on the basis of agreement/disagreement with the content.

On Lemmy, I'm honestly a bit lax about upvoting and downvoting at all. (I'm trying to be better about it.) Buy when I do upvote/downvote, I try to do so on the basis of whether the comment/post "adds to" or "subtracts from" the community or conversation. I can disagree with one comment's take on some subject but still upvote them if they've given me a more nuanced perspective on the issue. If they're just parrotting well-known talking points and not being thoughtful with their posts, I may downvote them evren if I agree with their ultimate stance.

I'm just mostly wondering how folks on Lemmy think about upvotes/downvotes and what implications that has for the content here.

68 comments

Upvoting: I like this post or it adds to the discussion/community (I want to see more of this)
Downvoting: This is spam, off topic, etc. or the poster is being an arse (in general, I want to see less of this)
Simple as.
- Up: Time was worth reading
  Down: Time wasted reading (I want my time back!)

Upvote: contributes positively to the discussion, hasnt been said before in the same thread, well researched/high effort
Downvote: trolling, obvious/overdone, bad/disingenuous reasoning, spreads misinformation, bigotry/sexism

"Do you wish there were more content like this?" Upvote.
"Do you wish there were less content like this?" Downvote.

I downvote for people being assholes (trolling, bigotry, ad hominem, etc), spreading misinformation, or making comments which don't add to the conversation ("This.", "This is the way."), and rarely for anything else.
I upvote content that I find interesting, educational, funny, etc. I also upvote people for being polite and willing to admit to being incorrect ("Thanks for the information, I didn't know that", etc).

If you reply to my comment or post, it’s an automatic upvote because I appreciate you for taking the time to interact with me and I will try to reply in return.
If a post or comment is funny, touching, interesting, heartfelt or anything else that makes me appreciate the time and effort you put into this, it’s an upvote.
If you’re only here to argue in bad faith, insult or belittle someone, it’s a downvote. If it’s with me, I will ignore you and not even downvote.
- Obligatory response.
  
  Happy upvote and reply :)
- Upvote me, sempai.
  
  Always :)

I like this: upvote
I don't like this: downvote
- This guy puts his pants on one leg at a time

Up: more people should read this
Down: less people should have to read this

I tend to upvote if someone brings something unique to the discussion. If you're just giving a quick generic response to OP or parroting the same opinion a dozen other people in the thread have already posted, then I'm gonna read your comment and keep going. But if you provide thoughtful content that promotes discussion, provides a unique perspective, or at least had a lot of thought put into it, I'm likely to upvote it. Same goes for the post itself.
I generally avoid downvoting, even if I disagree with the comment. But if someone is factually wrong, misleading, posting in bad faith, or just being a troll, I'll downvote their comments in a thread and upvote anyone who attempts to be reasonable with them. If two people are just bickering back and forth, they both get downvotes. And as always, any comments that distract from the discussion or are off-topic will get a downvote.
- If two people are just bickering back and forth, they both get downvotes.
  You made me think of this:
  scene from blues brothers with nun

I tend to agree about the down cote it if you disagree with it. I tend to just leave the thread or try not to comment to avoid silly online arguments.
However, if I read something posted that is obviously misleading or someone is just outright lying, then downvote away!

If it contributed to the conversation, I upvote. Especially if it's well-written and informative.
If it's off-topic, incorrect, or repetitive, I downvote.
If it's banal or uninteresting but not actually deleterious to discourse or distracting from the topic, I don't vote.
I upvote almost all replies to my comments, including those disagreeing with me, unless they clearly didn't take the time to read and understand my comment.
I vote on almost all comments I reply to, as well.
- I use this method as well but I also use the criteria that if I learned something new that is interesting or useful in my life I will upvote. If it's useless drivel or based on conspiracy theories then I downvote.

Upvote for funny posts, posts that contribute to the discussion even if they drift a bit off topic, and anything that promotes positivity.
No upvotes/downvites for things I disagree with that are just differences in opinions, or something that is trying to be funny but doesn't work for me. Also posts I just don't understand or understand the context.
Downvotes for people being jerks, posting misinformation, promoting terrible stuff like fascism, racism, sexism, etc. It does mean I mostly downvote anything positive about US conservatives, but that is because they tend to promote those things I mentioned already.
I sometimes also downvote people who go overboard with generally positive things by assuming anything other than agreeing with their narrow view is automatically malicious. Some of us are trying and admitting we aren't perfect or that maybe there is more than one way to be supportive than the one they think the only way.

"Reddiquette" that included guidelines about upvoting and downvoting.
First time that I even hear about that LOL.
I do not follow any 'guidelines' when up/downvoting. It comes spontaneously.
- Why not?
  
  Because it happens spontaneously.

I try to upvote most things I see, especially if someone took the time to comment under one of my posts.
If I downvote, it's usually because I see someone is actively being rude or is trying to steer something light into something controversial to bait arguments.
- I've found that the Risa community very much uses downvotes to disagree. I made a harmless joke and got dogpiled on, including a very toxic and rude comment from Stamets.
  Since you are a highly respected member there, and really all of Lemmy, I think it would be greatly beneficial for you to openly advocate for people sticking to your logic when it comes to downvotes.
  
  Thank you, and I'm sorry if people dogpiled on you about something. I just want everybody to be cool to each other and have fun.

I generally don't downvote anything. I, however, upvote stuff other people might want to see first. Easy as that.

I upvote any reply to anything I say and everything I reply to as a way of remembering where I've engaged. The only exceptions are things with clear perspective-lacking malice.

If I like it, I upvote. If I dislike it, I downvote. If I have no strong feelings, I do nothing. If I commented and it got a lot of upvotes, I return the favor and upvote the post and any decent comments.

downvotes are for condescension and things people already mentioned
- Downvoting a post because they weren't the first to respond is silly. Do you compare time stamps or just something with fewer upvotes and lolisted lower on the screen?
  It just seems like a weird reason to downvote, and I downvote pretty freely.
  
  i meant reasons people already talked about for downvoting

Upvote if I find the post good and remember it exists, downvote disabled

my instance has downvotes disabled - it allows me to move on with my life. Only upping just seems more zen

I'm pretty liberal with the upvotes. I like to encourage people to participate and an upvote feels like saying "hey I see you and thanks for sharing." I regularly upvote things I don't like or don't agree with, if they are shared in good faith and contribute to the conversation.
Downvotes are for bigots and misinformation/disinformation/lies.

You guys have a downvote? Whoa, here on .one we do not.
- I couldn't stand being on an instance without downvotes, personally. They are abused, but they serve a valid purpose.
  (I can see one person downvoted your comment btw.)

Upvote: it is the same thing I was going to comment, or it is an extraordinarily good post that stands out from the masses
Downvote: it is objectively wrong or doesn't add to the discussion at all
Vast majority of everything, I neither upvote nor downvote.

Generally, it's based on appropriateness to the C/, effort, and usefulness.
There are exceptions, though there aren't any on C/s that I actually use. But there might be eventually, there were on reddit.
If something doesn't fit the C/, that's a down vote if I notice it.
If something is horribly low effort, even if it's in the right place, that'll be a down vote.
Upvotes, it tends to be because something was appropriate to the C/, and/or someone put some work in. But, even a low effort post/comment can get an up vote if it's personally useful.
I used to up vote anything and everything that was on topic, but lemmy has gotten busy enough that I tend to only vote at all if I interact with the post in some way. So, like a title that indicates the post isn't something that will interest me, I just scroll past because there's just so much stuff now. But, I scroll All, and sort by new by default, so I end up scrolling past stuff that isn't in my subscription list. If I only scrolled through subscribed stuff, I'd probably end up voting the same amount, but voting on everything I saw, if that makes sense.

I was never a reddit member and so may miss some of that nuance, but I vote for things I enjoyed reading or for folks I enjoyed interacting with. I thought about down voting one thing, but then leaned that group didn't work that way. The whole point was to say something that was against the grain.

For posts:
Interesting content gets updoot. Spam, misinformation, and conservative politics get the downdoot.
For comments:
Relevant to the discussion (be it top-level or deep in a thread), funny, and factual statements get updoots. Irrelevant comments, false information, poor argumentative skills, and conservative political get the downdoot.
- conservative political get the downdoot.
  That's shitty imo. I'm on the left but there's plenty of conservative politics that aren't extreme or worthy of burying.
  My old coworker was conservative and we had some amazing conversations about politics and culture even though we usually didn't budge much on our positions. He was my favorite person to talk to about it because he brought in "the other side" that I wasn't otherwise exposed to.
  
  Conservative like slow to change or conservative in the modern political sense which just means trying to undo any progress on personal rights?
  
  Those conversations happen so rarely that it's not worth even considering that as a possibility until a reply or two has shown that they're not going to stonewall the conversation.
  In person things are one way, but on the anonymous Internet (especially lemmy and reddit) it's people who are 100% not going to adjust their actively garbage views on things and thus deserve to be treated as the dickheads they too often are
  If they don't like being pre judged based on their political beliefs they should rethink why people have an inherant dislike of them, and maybe change. Or learn to deal with the consequences of having dogshit opinions

I don't vote very much because that's just too much responsibility for me to handle.

I'm afraid it's the same algorithm I use to answer the question whether I need a receipt.

Downvotes are for off topic or inflammatory comments, not for things you disagree with, in my opinion.

I neither upvote nor downvote stuff.

I let lurkers do the upvoting or downvoting unless it's really good or really bad Downvotes don't federate from or to kbin anyway.
- I didn't know about the down votes, thanks for sharing.

My personal rules
Up = Like it, interesting novel take (even if I disagree), funny and clever
No vote with comment = disagree but worthwhile discussing, unintentional but incorrect and/or misleading info.
Down = Spam, low effort to the point it's insulting (clearly not reading beyond the title), flaming and flamebaiting (this is a big one on forums like this everywhere), trolling, intentionally incorrect or misleading information, off-topic/irrelevant stuff.
Report = hate speech, violence against members of our communities, incessant trolling or flaming or flamebaiting (more than twice in a row).
- @Rentlar This, this is it. I nominate this list for the official Fediquette !
  @TootSweet
  
  Thanks for the endorsement! If i run my own server them's'll be the rules.
  I agree having a general ettiquite/cross-Fediverse rules of conduct that won't get you banned on most servers. But (within the boundaries of law) I don't mind if other servers want to impose more or fewer restrictions in keeping with such an ettiquite and how strict it's enforced. Servers like Hexbear can go and do their silly thing so long as the "trolling the libs" kind of conduct is kept there.

I'm not sure if this is just another way of saying what others have said, but I also upvote if something accomplished the theme of the community. The example that comes to mind is from the other site, but if something on r/mademesmile actually made me smile, I upvoted. As for downvotes, I usually save them for posts that I want to be less visible for whatever reason. Sometimes that is because I disagree sometimes it is because they are reposts, or low effort trolling, etc. Right or wrong, that's how I do it.

"Glad i saw that" -> up-vote, "Wish i didn't see that" -> down-vote

Wow, I've used Reddit for years, and I have never ever seen such a guideline before! Now this is a really interesting post, and the comments are pretty insightful that make me think.
Yes, it totally makes sense not to upvote or downvote based on agreement or disagreement, but based on relevancy and accuracy. But what if the author is asking about our opinion, and someone has already commented my exact opinion? It feels natural to upvote it based on agreement.
Here's an example: there's a post asking about opinions, maybe advice, and then there are two comments. One that says "do drugs, kids, it's good", and one that says "no, don't do drugs, drugs are always bad". And I absolutely agree with one of those comments. If I upvote the one I agree with, and leave the other alone, maybe even downvote it, then the author of the post will see comments with weight. On the other hand, if I don't do anything, because "oh look, someone already commented my precise opinion, so I'm done here", then the author of the post might remain in doubt, because there will be two equally presented opinions and that's like no advice at all.
So all in all, it makes sense to have a system about what to upvote and what to downvote, but there are just things that feel wrong to upvote, even if the etiquette dictates that it should be upvoted.
Nevertheless, it would be a great idea to come up with a system (that can be applied in any situation) and stick to it.
Here's my take though:
What it felt like on Reddit by others:
Upvote: totally random
Downvote: totally random
What it feels like on Lemmy + what my impression of the voting system has been up until now:
Upvote: agree/useful/my girlfriend's post or comment
Downvote: strongly disagree/useless/spam/troll
From now on:
Well... this post definitely makes me think. I still have to make up my mind.

I downvote if it's cringe, or incorrect, or the opinion is disgusting. Usually it's a quality issue rather than an opinion/moral issue.
I upvote if it's useful info, or if it's funny or cool or impressive.

Up/downvotes are not intended as dis/agreement buttons. You are supposed to upvote relevant content and downvote irrelevant content, spam, trolls, hate, and misinformation/propoganda.
Upvoting on the basis of liking something played a large part in reddit's decline, where every sub was inundated with off-topic shit-posts of r/funny and r/adviceanimals circle-jerking. They were upvoted for a cheap laugh, but should've been downvoted for being off-topic.
The best example I had on reddit illustrating the importance of maintaining the integrity of community topics was this:
Do you think it's okay for r/wtf material of animals to be posted in r/awww or r/EyeBleach? If r/TheOnion posts were posted in r/WorldNews?
Comments on subs like r/TIL and even r/science became nothing but irrelevant jokes and memes, which buried relevant discussion. This voting behavior is why subs like r/nonononoyes lost their purpose and were spammed with shitty r/funny cross-posts.
I strictly upvote on the basis of relevant content. My wife has thought I'm crazy when I show her something we both are entertained by, and then she sees me promptly downvote it. Even if I enjoy something, I will downvote it if it's an off-topic post.
Conversely, I upvote dissenting opinions I don't agree with, even if I'm debating someone, if it is promoting topic discussion. When people downvote out of disagreement, it suppresses dissenting opinions and healthy discourse.
Downvoting due to disagreement is what leads to toxic echo-chamers. (Again, there's a clear difference in downvoting content promoting hate/racism/bigotry.)
Upvoting on the basis of cheap entertainment promotes off-topic and low-quality discussion/posting behavior.

I agree with it then I upvote. Usually don't downvote.

90% of the time, I just accidentally hit one of the arrows while scrolling on my phone and didn't notice.

I generally don't downvote. I report a comment/post if they break rules. I block users that are stupid, mean, comment in bad faith, or are otherwise negative to my experience. I use an app that allows me to apply unique labels to users that only I can see if I am not quite ready to block them but want to be ready on next offense. I.e., someone who uses dog whistle language but I'm not sure it was intentional.
Most of the accounts I made for Lemmy are on instances that disable downvoting. That wasn't planned on my part, but I don't mind.

I rarely upvote/downvote anything. I've upvoted posts or comments that have actually made me laugh or are very thought provoking.
Downvotes start coming when I think a post is very retarded and/or has wasted my time reading that it gets what it deserves. Oh and repeated posts that aren't structured very well that the poster could've taken some time to word better but you know they're rushing it for validity.

I never downvote and judge people who do.
It's lazy fast food self validation that you're superior to someone at the push of a button, and a big reason social media is shit.

68 comments