Depends on why it’s being downvoted?
If the OP was saying that anything other than firefly is the greatest sci-fi-western ever … leave it up.
If it’s something truly inappropriate… mods can take it down, yeah?
If a post gets a lot of downvotes should it be removed?
Submitted 1 year ago by dope@lemm.ee to [deleted]
Comments
FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 year ago
dope@lemm.ee 1 year ago
So it’s a matter of whether you like it or not. Which is reflected in your vote.
FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 year ago
No. It doesn’t matter if, for example, one likes, let’s say Babylon 5… and posting bab5 memes to the star wars community. That’s not what that community is about, and should be taken down.
And this is ignoring the kind of things that are absolutely awful and never appropriate
ChlorineAddict@lemmy.world 1 year ago
To use a Reddit example, think of it this scenario:
Last I recall the most downvoted comment of all time was when a representative from EA said paying $80 to unlock Darth Vader in their recently released Battlefront game was to give players a sense of pride.
The fact the community was downvoting it with such fervor should have been important feedback to EA. If any platform were to blanket remove posts without review of an overly negative sentiment then EA wouldn’t have known they flew too close to the sun with greed on that comment.
I do think the idea of downvote removal is a valid one to clear out a lot of garbage, but it removes the community’s voice and could result in easy suppression mechanism of types of content or information by those gaming the system which is why I would vote no on auto-deletion, but maybe leaning yes on triggering review.
Though in that review there would have to be some guidelines from the mod team in the channel’s sidebar on what content would and wouldn’t be removed. Would a question people where people don’t agree with what is being proposed be deleted even though it’s not a stupid question? That could be an opportunity to learn more. Would a highly racist/sexist/etc question be removed? I’d vote yes, get rid of that troll.
One last thing on auto-remove: sometimes timezones have differing viewpoints. I clarified some terms that I’m an expert on and most newbies confuse, but I did it at a weird hour of the day for me. I was downvoted pretty heavily for the first 12h of my post, but then it recovered back to zero, then positive. Despite being a worldwide sport different regions have different definitions for the same labels. This is not something any of us in the community had realized until the follow up comments of people coming to my defense which led to a back and forth discovering both sides of the debate were regionally grouped. I still thing my region is right. But that mod review would have been dependent on the mod region, and we may have never gotten an answer, which is why my vote on auto-review is a maybe. I’d want to see a more fully flushed proposal before saying yes.
pqdinfo@lemmy.world 1 year ago
That’s an orthogonal thing though. Downvotes and removals are generally triggered by different things, even if they intersect occasionally:
- “I think The Mandalorian is the best sci-fi western ever” is a reasonable thing to post in c/tv, c/scifi, c/westerns, etc.
- “I think The Mandalorian is the best sci-fi western ever” might be a reasonable thing in an open topic about comparing Firefly to other space westerns in c/firefly
- "I think The Mandalorian is the best sci-fi western ever" is clearly an off topic troll if posted as a top level reply to a question “Do you think Mal will ever find his true love” in c/firefly
In all three cases, it’s entirely possible the comment will get a lot of downvotes. But the fact it’s off-topic and, in context, intended to troll, that means the third case is the only one where you’d want it removed.
Indeed, it’s possible to envisage a highly upvoted comment that also ends up being removed because it’s off topic or an attempt to derail. Those are actually harder to remove, and I’ve seen (Reddit) moderators make the wrong call on them when they’re successful attempts to derail because they’re not always as obvious.
6mementomori@lemmy.world 1 year ago
no
krayj@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
No, because that would open up an exploit that would give vote brigades a form of censorship power.
NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 1 year ago
No.
If a post gets many downvotes, then it might be because of rules violation.
But downvotes are still no reason for deletion.
Rules violation should be the only valid reason for deleting a post.
dope@lemm.ee 1 year ago
But it brings it under the scrutiny of the mod. Bringing the possibility that it may be removed. A possibility that did not exist before. And if you didn’t like the post then there is a chance that the mod doesn’t like the post. Then voila, removal.
qjkxbmwvz@lemmy.sdf.org 1 year ago
“mod doesn’t like the post” doesn’t always mean “mod removes post.”
NPC@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I feel like you’re looking at it wrong: If you imagine a community to be a town square, then every comment is someone standing on a soap box shouting into the crowd. The mods are the police standing on the side lines.
In this scenario, as long as no one says anything illegal (or against the community’s rules), the police should just stand there and keep watch. If the whole crowd starts booing the person shouting on their soap box, it would clearly be wrong for the police to silence this person or to remove them from the town square. They should be allowed to be there and say whatever they want, just as you should be allowed to voice your opinion on what they’re saying.
Saying something that people don’t like hearing should never be a reason to silence someone by itself. There are valid reasons to “silence” ( you know, remove a comment or ban them) someone, but "I (we) don’t like what they’re saying can never be a reason to do so.
SolOrion@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
It’s not being removed because it was down voted. It’s being removed because it broke the rules. Reports can serve the exact same function if you disable down votes. Heck, they would probably work better at getting mod attention.
That’s got nothing to do with automatic removal based on down voting. Think about how easily that could be abused? And with honestly no options aside from flatly leaving the platform. If you have an issue with a moderator, or the rules of a community you can simply find different community or even instance.
algorithmae@lemmy.one 1 year ago
How else would we roast OP?
dope@lemm.ee 1 year ago
See, they like what you just said. They upvoted you. These people like roasting.
expatriado@lemmy.world 1 year ago
a downvoted post gets buried anyway
dope@lemm.ee 1 year ago
That’s a very good point.
wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Downvoting should be removed. In most instances, it is someone downvoting for a dumb reason. If it is a violation it should be reported. If it a difference of opinion, just don’t upvote.
TheDoctorDonna@lemmy.world 1 year ago
People want a way to express their dislike without getting in to a stupid internet fight about it. Look at how long people rallied for a dislike button on Facebook.
NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Downvoting should be removed.
I need to downvote this!
:-)
dope@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Most of us downvote anything that criticizes or deviates even slightly. We are as sensitive as a ripe pimple in that way.
It basically makes social media what it is.
As for how it “should” be… well, I have some ideas too. I guess that’s a question of engineering.
wintermute_oregon@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Let’s hear them.
I have seen a few instances remove downvoting, and they seem to run more smoothly. They tend to be more civil.
AgentGrimstone@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Depends. Troll posts, yes. Unpopular opinions, no.
6mementomori@lemmy.world 1 year ago
no
jet@hackertalks.com 1 year ago
No, but that should trigger moderator review
dope@lemm.ee 1 year ago
That’s a kind of soft removal
NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Not if the mod is smarter than a piece of wood