poll Should NP downvoting be anonymous?

[redemo]

Simple question. Do you think downvoting and upvoting should be anonymous on Namepros, yes or no?

 

[bmugford]

The sheer possibility that posting “Greetings!” when someone introduces themselves would go against an unspoken forum etiquette is rather ridiculous. Especially considering there are far more concerning things that are stated here on the regular.

This type of thing is a problem.

Why would anyone get downvotes for that comment?

There are a lot of things @QUAD DOMAINS posts that I don't really agree with, but is leads to a discussion.

Just leaving downvotes, especially for a "Greetings" comment, is unreasonable.

Brad

 

[bmugford]

Not as much as I expected. However, if we instead look at the people giving the downvotes (rather than receiving them), then we see that a small percentage of people are responsible for the overwhelming majority of downvotes. They’re relatively indiscriminate in who they downvote.

Well, you have access to data that I don't.

How many people are abusing the system? Is that one person, 5, 10, 100, 500? I have no idea.

It does seem like some people and subjects are targeted more than others from my view.

I’m not in favor of removing downvotes: I think that’s useful feedback, and there’s nothing wrong with posting sometime controversial. We don’t have to weight downvotes as heavily as upvotes; that’s a knob we can tune until we hit a sweet spot.

Alright, then let's start there.

There are multiple possible solutions from minor to major.

Right now the amount up upvotes and downvotes you can leave is based on a number of factors.

Am I right that if you can leave 5 upvotes, you can also leave 5 downvotes?

Why not make it so you can leave less downvotes, or make it so they just count for less.

Maybe you can leave 25%-50% of the downvotes you can with upvotes, or maybe they are just counted like that.

It seems like that would be a good starting point. People can still leave downvotes, but they are not weighted as heavily.

Brad

 

[Peter45]

Sometimes, though, it's best to not take the downvotes too personally.

You are missing the point LCD

It's not about personal feelings, it's about improving the forum's quality.
Mod Paul's reference to "feelings" - justifying the status quo in order to protect the feelings of those Gold accounts and Vip members who desire anonymity - unfortunately has highjacked the discussion:

That one person is still a human with feelings. Part of the job of a moderation team--or any oversight body--is to protect the minority from the majority. Several people have expressed concern about their votes suddenly becoming public, and those concerns are both understandable and justified, regardless of what we've stated our plans are.

The main question is whether anon downvoting improve the discussion within this community.
It is abundantly clear that it doesn't.

a) Your disagreeing with an opinion without saying why, is pointless.
The community doesn't learn nothing from your downvoting.

b) As soon as a posting contains more than 1 statement downvoting that posting means squat because the community cannot understand what is disagreed with.

But the worst part is, given a) and b) anon downvoting has become a way to hit people: the target of anonymous downvoting has shifted from the content of a posting to the attitude i.e. the character of the poster.

That's the main reason why anon downvoting hinders the discussion within this community.

 

[Peter45]

This type of thing is a problem.

Why would anyone get downvotes for that comment?

There are a lot of things @QUAD DOMAINS posts that I don't really agree with, but is leads to a discussion.

Just leaving downvotes, especially for a "Greetings" comment, is unreasonable.

Brad

There a thousands of examples showing how ridiculous this tool is


This guy informed the community about an email he received from DAN re their connection with Afternic.
He didn't say anything, he just posted the email.

"Well, I don't like Dan's integration within Afternic, so I'll give a thumb down.
Click.
There you go."

These 4 morons didn't realise that downvoting a posting you are penalising its poster.

Through this dysfunctional tool this community has penalised someone who did us a favour

 

[bmugford]

There a thousands of examples showing how ridiculous this tool is


This guy informed the community about an email he received from DAN re their connection with Afternic.
He didn't say anything, he just posted the email.

Show attachment 244986

"Well, I don't like Dan's integration within Afternic, so I'll give a thumb down.
Click.
There you go."

These 4 morons didn't realise that downvoting a posting you are penalising its poster.

Through this dysfunctional tool this community has penalised someone who did us a favour

Meanwhile, you got -3 for discussing downvotes.

The current system has issues.

 

[Peter45]

Meanwhile, you got -3 for discussing downvotes.

The current system has issues.



Show attachment 244990

@Paul
I'd like to know who are those 3 NP members who downvoted me.
You don't allow me to know their nicknames.
Why?
To protect their feelings?



Hello downvoter
you who just downvoted my last posting
why don't you reveal your nickname?
You are afraid of what?

 

[QUAD DOMAINS]

This type of thing is a problem.

Why would anyone get downvotes for that comment?

There are a lot of things @QUAD DOMAINS posts that I don't really agree with, but is leads to a discussion.

Just leaving downvotes, especially for a "Greetings" comment, is unreasonable.

Brad

Thanks @bmugford for acknowledging the absurdity in downvoting “Greetings!”. We’ve found something to agree on.

Mel
QUAD Domains

 

[QUAD DOMAINS]

Meanwhile, you got -3 for discussing downvotes.

The current system has issues.



Show attachment 244990

There should be an account penalty issued for being a habitual downvoter. If they (NamePros) aren’t going to rid the platform of the downvote, they should at least equally distribute the negative impact. (Ex: For every 5 threads you downvote, you receive a negative profile point.) After receiving so many negative profile points, you receive a bright red habitual downvoter badge on your profile. That ought to discourage habitual downvoting behavior.

Thoughts?

Mel
QUAD Domains

 

[Paul]

Am I right that if you can leave 5 upvotes, you can also leave 5 downvotes?

No.

Why not make it so you can leave less downvotes, or make it so they just count for less.

That's how it works. You can't downvote as much as you can upvote.

 

[bmugford]

No.


That's how it works. You can't downvote as much as you can upvote.

I wouldn't know because I am not in the habit of leaving downvotes.

I tested on your post and was able to leave 1/2 the number of downvotes as upvotes.

Is that the standard ratio everyone has?

Maybe it just needs to be dialed back more.

Brad

 

[Paul]

I believe it’s variable. Other staff have already written in more detail about how it works, but the rough idea is that the more positive feedback you’ve received (upvotes, thanks, likes, agrees), the more impact you can have on other people’s content, both positive and negative.

Some people who have abused this can’t leave any downvotes, for example.

 

[Peter45]

There should be an account penalty issued for being a habitual downvoter. If they (NamePros) aren’t going to rid the platform of the downvote, they should at least equally distribute the negative impact. (Ex: For every 5 threads you downvote, you receive a negative profile point.) After receiving so many negative profile points, you receive a bright red habitual downvoter badge on your profile. That ought to discourage habitual downvoting behavior.

Thoughts?

Anonymous downvoting has two aspects:
a) signalising disagreement with a posting
b) punishing its author by lowering his Impact Score

The - extremely toxic - consequences for the community life of anonymously penalising/punishing posters derive from b)


The solution: sever the connection between a) and b)

Anonymous downvoting won’t affect IS anymore. It won’t penalise the poster’s account anymore.

You keep your anonymous downvoting,
the feelings of your Gold Account and Vip Member friends are safe,
nobody cares anymore about being downvoted.

Everybody is happy


And downvoting trolls disappear because where there is no chance of hurting people there is no fun.
How about that

 

[Paul]

And downvoting trolls disappear because where there is no chance of hurting people there is no fun.
How about that

Most people who feel hurt by their impact score going down are also going to feel hurt by downvotes.

 

[Paul]

Here's an idea:

• Remove the ability to downvote a post below 0 points. It will still be possible to downvote to the 0-point mark.
• Negative quick replies (e.g., "Dislike") will still be able to decrease the points below zero, but quick replies aren't anonymous.

We would still be aiming to improve the post quality system further as other team members have described elsewhere, but this would be easy to implement and would likely hold us over. It should also help with the issue of newbies being downvoted into oblivion, since it won't be possible to do that anonymously anymore.

Thoughts?

 

[D Haynes]

Here's an idea:

• Remove the ability to downvote a post below 0 points. It will still be possible to downvote to the 0-point mark.
• Negative quick replies (e.g., "Dislike") will still be able to decrease the points below zero, but quick replies aren't anonymous.

We would still be aiming to improve the post quality system further as other team members have described elsewhere, but this would be easy to implement and would likely hold us over. It should also help with the issue of newbies being downvoted into oblivion, since it won't be possible to do that anonymously anymore.

Thoughts?

Why not just get rid of the ability to upvote and downvote in their own right? Then the post score can only be affected by quick replies which aren't anonymous.

 

[Paul]

Why not just get rid of the ability to upvote and downvote in their own right? Then the post score can only be affected by quick replies which aren't anonymous.

Other staff members who are more familiar with the plans have already commented on that, but the voting system is necessary for features we plan to implement down the road. It also offers a level of granularity that the quick reply system lacks. While we aren't currently considering removing votes, we're certainly open to changing their behavior.

This begs another question. Can't you simply put the old reputation system back into use? The system without the + and - options. It just worked.

It had other issues, especially on the technical side. The current system offers a lot more flexibility: we can prevent people from gaming the system with voting rings, for example. We can also weight votes differently based on who they're coming from, which forum the content is in, and so on.

The long term goal remains to deanonymize all votes and use them as a way to let the community self-moderate, to an extent. However, a lot of tinkering needs to be done to get there--it's important that we avoid creating an environment in which a bunch of NamePros insiders scare away everyone else.

 

[Peter45]

Here's an idea:

• Remove the ability to downvote a post below 0 points. It will still be possible to downvote to the 0-point mark.
• Negative quick replies (e.g., "Dislike") will still be able to decrease the points below zero, but quick replies aren't anonymous.

We would still be aiming to improve the post quality system further as other team members have described elsewhere, but this would be easy to implement and would likely hold us over. It should also help with the issue of newbies being downvoted into oblivion, since it won't be possible to do that anonymously anymore.

Thoughts?

There you go Paul

5x

 

[Paul]

There you go Paul




Show attachment 245119

5x

Are you saying no to the idea or no to Bravo’s response?

 

[D Haynes]

Other staff members who are more familiar with the plans have already commented on that, but the voting system is necessary for features we plan to implement down the road. It also offers a level of granularity that the quick reply system lacks. While we aren't currently considering removing votes, we're certainly open to changing their behavior.


It had other issues, especially on the technical side. The current system offers a lot more flexibility: we can prevent people from gaming the system with voting rings, for example. We can also weight votes differently based on who they're coming from, which forum the content is in, and so on.

The long term goal remains to deanonymize all votes and use them as a way to let the community self-moderate, to an extent. However, a lot of tinkering needs to be done to get there--it's important that we avoid creating an environment in which a bunch of NamePros insiders scare away everyone else.

What are the features you plan to implement that the current points/votes system will enable?

Doing away with any form of anonymous voting would certainly be the way forward. People should be accountable. Not agreeing with someone is fine but atleast users would be able to see who downvotes but can't be arsed or have the respect to outline why.

 

[kor]

Here's an idea:

• Remove the ability to downvote a post below 0 points. It will still be possible to downvote to the 0-point mark.
• Negative quick replies (e.g., "Dislike") will still be able to decrease the points below zero, but quick replies aren't anonymous.

Or just simply disable anonymous dislike. It's not a rocket science.

Well-known social media platforms like facebook, instagram, twitter never had dislike option. Youtube recently disabled (hide) dislike also.

Negativity brings negativity and it grows like an avalanche.

 

[Peter45]

Are you saying no to the idea or no to Bravo’s response?

It depends Paul
those 5 people, did they downvote the idea or Bravo's response?

 

[Peter45]

Not agreeing with someone is fine but at least users would be able to see who downvotes but can't be arsed or have the respect to outline why.

Disagreeing with someone onymously is fine.

What about penalising onymously other members' accounts?

Disagreeing and penalising, two consequences of downvoting.

Allowing to penalise anonymously other members' accounts, it really needs minimal social skills to understand how destructive that is for a community

 

[D Haynes]

Dislikes aren't anonymous. You can view all the dislikes on a post.

Are you dumb or you just trying to be a shitty troll?!

I think @kor is confusing dislikes with downvotes so you are both right really.

The dislikes aren't an issue for me as they aren't anonymous.

The downvotes are anonymous and trolls wet dream. The sooner they're removed the better.

 

[Paul]

The downvotes are anonymous and trolls wet dream. The sooner they're removed the better.

We're won't be removing them, but we would like to solve the anonymity issue.

 

[bmugford]

Here's an idea:

• Remove the ability to downvote a post below 0 points. It will still be possible to downvote to the 0-point mark.
• Negative quick replies (e.g., "Dislike") will still be able to decrease the points below zero, but quick replies aren't anonymous.

We would still be aiming to improve the post quality system further as other team members have described elsewhere, but this would be easy to implement and would likely hold us over. It should also help with the issue of newbies being downvoted into oblivion, since it won't be possible to do that anonymously anymore.

Thoughts?

While it is not an ultimate solution to the problem, I view it as better than nothing in the short term.

I have no idea how deep the problem goes. You have the data on the anonymous downvoting that others don't.

If it is isolated to a handful of bad actors, maybe another option is to create some policy around what is considered "abuse" of the system.

Then, if specific accounts are seen as abusing the system you can take appropriate action.

Brad