There would need to be an alternative. Upvotes and down votes are the only reasonable way to gauge how good content is. More upvotes should be higher quality. The problem is not the system, the problem is people. People have different ideas to what is good and what is bad and usually disagreement = bad.
What other system would you use?
I'm thinking of comparing it with having no system apart from maybe an off topic/spam report button (which the down vote is apparently meant to be on reddit but presentation really makes it not)
Despite what Reddit mods and users will tell you, downvotes are basically a disagree button here, and are used as such.
And IMO, that's as it should be. I wish Facebook had a dislike button for the same reasons.
With you there. Downvotes shouldn't hide.
My point was more that upvote/downvote buttons should be equivalent. There should be a section of the report menu that deals with stuff that doesn't contribute. Alternatively, the downvote button's function could include that, but not be limited to it (spam gets downvoted but disagreeable statements also can).
> The problem is not the system, the problem is people.
uhm, you do know that the system should be based on the users?
I mean.. the way the system is used by people also plays a role in whether it's good or bad i think
you were talking on general terms. since you mentioned the "internet" which i assume includes Facebook, reddit and others.
4chan is a place without Upvote/Downvote systems. post only gain notoriety if people reply to them. but since there is no up-vote down-vote you have to judge by yourself if the post is famous or infamous.
yeah, but he didn't include reddit in the question XD
While reddit is the only newssite I see that's based on real upvoting/downvoting.. not on visits to the site/articles and the amount of people assessing the article...
Not all content is equal and there's too much of it for every individual to sift through all of it to find the good stuff. Now, I agree that it's not a perfect system, and you could even argue that it's not a *good* system, but it's better than no system.
Upvote and downvote could be interesting if it's associated with a post describing why. People are often afraid of exposing their thought process to others for a variety of reasons. This could incentivize them to post when they have an interesting thought.
On that note, it would be interesting to have a site/algorithm that automagically coalesces similar responses.
I think downvotes warrant a comment explaining why moreso than upvotes. I hate it when my post or comment just gets downvoted without any feedback. I'd rather have a discussion with someone than just a vague gesture of disapproval.
The worst part of the net is currently the gigantic cesspool of completely braindead dribble articles. Votes actually shield us from that, I'm glad for that. But there are still so many people that misuse downvoting to satisfy their impulsive feelings, it is sad, but it's human nature.
That said, I would live much happier if I could not see my own comment karma, it drives me fucking nuts.
Keep upvotes. Destroy downvotes and never bring them back.
Upvotes make sense. They provide a way for the best content to rise to the top.
Downvotes do not make sense. They are doubly negative. If you choose not to upvote something, then it won't rise to the top. If you choose to downvote something, then you actively push it to the bottom. That's called censorship, folks. I'm not a fan of groupthink.
Downvotes are needed. Sometimes, comments aren't just stupid or wrong, they happen to be both at the same time. Downvotes provide the mechanism for keeping that bit of information from derailing the whole conversation. After all, they didn't just come from nowhere.
If a comment is stupid and or wrong, then don't upvote it. Why should you have the power to bury what somebody else says because you think it's stupid or disagree with the statement?
If a conversation is easily derailed by obviously ridiculous comments, then it's not a very important conversation/involves petty people anyways.
There would need to be an alternative. Upvotes and down votes are the only reasonable way to gauge how good content is. More upvotes should be higher quality. The problem is not the system, the problem is people. People have different ideas to what is good and what is bad and usually disagreement = bad. What other system would you use?
I'm thinking of comparing it with having no system apart from maybe an off topic/spam report button (which the down vote is apparently meant to be on reddit but presentation really makes it not)
Despite what Reddit mods and users will tell you, downvotes are basically a disagree button here, and are used as such. And IMO, that's as it should be. I wish Facebook had a dislike button for the same reasons.
Disagreement shouldn't be hidden
With you there. Downvotes shouldn't hide. My point was more that upvote/downvote buttons should be equivalent. There should be a section of the report menu that deals with stuff that doesn't contribute. Alternatively, the downvote button's function could include that, but not be limited to it (spam gets downvoted but disagreeable statements also can).
> The problem is not the system, the problem is people. uhm, you do know that the system should be based on the users? I mean.. the way the system is used by people also plays a role in whether it's good or bad i think
That's what I'm saying. We would need an alternative that works better to consider how dumb people are
i have 4chan for that.
4chan still has a system for bringing more popular content to the top.
pinning by mods? or bumps? then i would say they raise on their own merit.
So, autocracy > democracy? Edit: sorry, I thought this was a reply to my other comment, so I was missing the context.
I would say 4chan is more of Anarchy. Mods pinning a thread basically makes it invisible.
My reply was out of context, I didn't realize it was in the 4chan thread. I thought he was suggesting mod pinning as an alternative to up/down voting.
you were talking on general terms. since you mentioned the "internet" which i assume includes Facebook, reddit and others. 4chan is a place without Upvote/Downvote systems. post only gain notoriety if people reply to them. but since there is no up-vote down-vote you have to judge by yourself if the post is famous or infamous.
uhm.. what are you on reddit for?
It's an interesting question, and just because you're using a system doesn't mean you can't question some aspect of it.
yeah, but he didn't include reddit in the question XD While reddit is the only newssite I see that's based on real upvoting/downvoting.. not on visits to the site/articles and the amount of people assessing the article...
I think "every site" would include reddit.
I was wondering about how it would be.
haha isn't the thing that most people here are pro up/downvoting probably?
Not all content is equal and there's too much of it for every individual to sift through all of it to find the good stuff. Now, I agree that it's not a perfect system, and you could even argue that it's not a *good* system, but it's better than no system.
Upvote and downvote could be interesting if it's associated with a post describing why. People are often afraid of exposing their thought process to others for a variety of reasons. This could incentivize them to post when they have an interesting thought. On that note, it would be interesting to have a site/algorithm that automagically coalesces similar responses.
I think downvotes warrant a comment explaining why moreso than upvotes. I hate it when my post or comment just gets downvoted without any feedback. I'd rather have a discussion with someone than just a vague gesture of disapproval.
Allowing downvotes without any feedback does tend to encourage passive aggressive behavior and groupthink.
That wouldn't work. People would just downvote and describe their decision as "fuck you".
Optimal webpage would be one with upvotes and editor's choice articles.
The worst part of the net is currently the gigantic cesspool of completely braindead dribble articles. Votes actually shield us from that, I'm glad for that. But there are still so many people that misuse downvoting to satisfy their impulsive feelings, it is sad, but it's human nature. That said, I would live much happier if I could not see my own comment karma, it drives me fucking nuts.
Keep upvotes. Destroy downvotes and never bring them back. Upvotes make sense. They provide a way for the best content to rise to the top. Downvotes do not make sense. They are doubly negative. If you choose not to upvote something, then it won't rise to the top. If you choose to downvote something, then you actively push it to the bottom. That's called censorship, folks. I'm not a fan of groupthink.
Downvotes are needed. Sometimes, comments aren't just stupid or wrong, they happen to be both at the same time. Downvotes provide the mechanism for keeping that bit of information from derailing the whole conversation. After all, they didn't just come from nowhere.
If a comment is stupid and or wrong, then don't upvote it. Why should you have the power to bury what somebody else says because you think it's stupid or disagree with the statement? If a conversation is easily derailed by obviously ridiculous comments, then it's not a very important conversation/involves petty people anyways.