OMG a downvote button

Anton Longshot

Posts: 627   +917
OMG a downvote button! :eek:
Curious to see how this will work out.
Elsewhere I see mixed results tbh but it mostly depends on the commenters.

Negatives:
#1 Bandwagon downvoting - lazy commenters downvote when they see a bunch of downvotes, without reading the post.
#2 Personal downvoters - some commenters dedicate a little piece of their sorry lives to downvoting every post of commenters they decided to hate - one or two's amusing but it becomes problemetic for commenters who make a lot of enemies. While it's easy to spot these people and subsequently ask them to cut out their disruptive behavior the administrators must be willing to do this.

Anyways we'll see how it goes.
 
By removing, at least on my computer, who agrees or disagrees with a post. Is Techspot turning into a stuffed support animal?
 
I don't like it one bit. Just look at Reddit. Downvotes always turn communities into circlejerking echo chambers, and serve only to silence opinions that go against the majority.

Most people don't know how to use downvote / thumbs down buttons, and basically use it as a "I disagree with you" button.

I'm disappointed that TS decided to implement such a feature after so long, with so many use cases that show that this doesn't improve any communities where it's implemented IMO. Never thought I'd see this here.

I hope at least there isn't some threshold to auto-hide or move down comments that receive a high number of negative reactions. Comments with elevated negative reactions should only be used by the staff as an alarm (I.e. give moderation a notification if they pass a threshold, for possible spam, offtopic, offensive or trollish comments).
 
This is essentially my take on this. I saw the need, for a while. We have now implemented it. And reverting it back to only likes is two clicks away, so that's great, too.
IIRC, you and I discussed this years ago. Basically, if someone doesn't like a member, all they have to do is just keep clicking on the down vote button. There's no thought, reasoning, or attempt at counterpoint involved.

If one person disapproves of another that intensely, blocking is still available. As you're likely aware, I'd rather fight than wimp out and block somebody, much less take the easy way out with a down vote button. I've only blocked one person in my 20 years here.

I can't help but notice that you elected to keep the old publish the names behind those likes in this thread. What's up with, and what's the reasoning behind that? I know I very much appreciate seeing the names of those agreeing with, or enjoying my material, as well as the names of the other members in sync with the other party in the discussion.

If you want to turn this forum into YouTube, where nonsense like 999 people like a video, and one miscreant comes by and gives it a down vote happens, you've got a good start going toward that end.

So, the down vote option is a "godsend" toward those who can't defend their position, or are too lazy to type out a response. For the rest of us, not so much. It just encourages a lack of participation. It doesn't require any research, initiative, or even simple mental acuity.

Take note that with the down vote active in this thread, I wouldn't have had to put any time, thought or effort into this response. Just two "thumbs down", on both your posts, and I'd be outta here. Something to think about, ay?

Cheers...!
 
Last edited:
f one person disapproves of another that intensely, blocking is still available. As you're likely aware, I'd rather fight than wimp out and block somebody, much less take the easy way out with a down vote button. I've only blocked one person in my 20 years here.
(y) (Y)
I can't help but notice that you elected to keep the old publish the names behind those likes in this thread. What's up with, and what's the reasoning behind that? I know I very much appreciate seeing the names of those agreeing with, or enjoying my material, as well as the names of the other members in sync with the other party in the discussion.
They are still visible on the "Likes Received" page of your profile, Captain.
If you want to turn this forum into YouTube, where nonsense like 999 people like a video, and one miscreant comes by and gives it a down vote happens, you've got a good start going toward that end.

So, the down vote option is a "godsend" toward those who can't defend their position, or are too lazy to type out a response. For the rest of us, not so much. It just encourages a lack of participation. It doesn't require any research, initiative, or even simple mental acuity.
It seems the downvote button comes without the threat of moderation. Don't like someone or their post, simply downvote them without fear of moderation or wasting your time replying to someone who probably won't listen to you anyway. There have been many times where some dolt has made a comment to me or at me, and I've just rolled my eyes and let it slide because I figured I would be wasting my time replying to someone who is incapable of understanding what I've said.
Take note that with the down vote active in this thread, I wouldn't have had to put any time, thought or effort into this response. Just two "thumbs down", on both your posts, and I'd be outta here. Something to think about, ay?

Cheers...!
I'm not sure how much I'll use it, but I'm OK with it being there.
 
They are still visible on the "Likes Received" page of your profile, Captain
I'm aware that there are workarounds. Likes would/are still present on the notices panel also.

However, my account is trashed to the point where I can't even rely on the fact that a page I click on will open on the first three tries . I gave up complaining about it about a decade ago. So, anything other than looking down and seeing, someone's name attributed to the like is well, a nuisance.

I will say it's nice to the that the "something went wrong, check your browser console for more information" dogma has finally been repaired. It always seemed as though the site was trying to blame your browser, for it's shortcomings. Perhaps I'm taking that too personally. Seriously, who doesn't enjoy hitting"refresh", and then being greeted with a blank white page, a few times?

As for the names of likes given being present under your post, I'm going to sidetrack for a moment and discuss interpersonal communication. (This is from an awfully tedious book an alleged friend gave me.) When two people talk, it's considered a "dyad". They can agree or disagree, but the interaction is limited to those two interactions. When the number of individuals in the conversation increase to three, the possibility of forming a conspiracy presents itself. I "saved" Scavenger from a nasty, pointless, discussion recently, by "conspiring" with him. I tend to read "through" posts, preferring instead, to evaluate what the poster's values and belief systems are before I engage. Thus the other night, I picked out a catchphrase, "did you take the jab" out of context with the subject of the thread. I'm not claiming any degree of brilliance, but I knew right off the bat, we were dealing with an anti-vax MAGAt, and called scav off knowing the individual's erroneous belief systems were effectively, set in stone. Still, if you don't dispute a concept, the other member's ego won't allow them to assume anything other than a win on their part.

All of that leads me to firmly believe that the names in full view attached to a like received, strongly adds to a sense of community, the way some stupid down or up vote button never can.

Maybe there's a compromise to be had. Post the names of both the down voters and those who liked the post. Not that I imagine that could or would be accomplished in less than another decade. And well, I'm not as young as I used to be.

Speaking of moderation, I haven;t seen any evidence of Mailpup's presence recently. IIRC we got along pretty well, even when I was being chastised for "bad behavior".

I hope he's well. I hope he's still with us. If both statuses are true, bully. OTOH, maybe he just simply got fed up with babysitting this collection of miscreants for free, Anyway, I kinda miss him.

Cheers...!
 
By removing, at least on my computer, who agrees or disagrees with a post. Is Techspot turning into a stuffed support animal?
As we're likely both well aware, we disagree on virtually everything. However, I'm still not shallow or vindictive enough to ever down vote one, or for that matter any, of your posts. I sincerely hope you'll extend me the same courtesy.

Apparently, upvotes received have notifications given. Down votes are completely anonymous. Which is utter bullsh!t, at least IMHO.

It also seems that the site is now subtracting the down votes from upvotes. Which again IMHO, is an even bigger, smellier, pile of bullsh!t.

Going one step further, 2 down votes will apparently get a post hidden altogether. Under this new system I'm pretty sure I could get enough people together to have everything you ever post, hidden altogether. Likewise, I'm sure you could do the same to me.

If @Julio Franco believes this is "anyway to run an airline", I'm frankly appalled at his lack of consideration for his most intimate core group of loyal members, and lack of reasonable decision making skills.

It seems the site has been modified to a state worse than the free for all that is YouTube. or for that matter, even Reddit.
 
Last edited:
Once again...

We are trialing a downvote button. That's it. It may work well for our community, it may not. No essay necessary or overthinking what could happen. We'll see how it goes.
My good friend Mr. Franco, I've already seen how it's going, and in my apparently worthless opinion, it's not good, or anywhere close to it. The software is subtracting down votes from likes, and hiding posts altogether after 2 down votes.

Likes are notified, while down votes are anonymous. If there's any equity in in that, I fail to see it. The software needs to, "grow a pair", and attach a member name to a down vote. But as I'm frequently labeled as "difficult", perhaps even "dense", the "value" of this modification has been completely lost on me.

I remember the good old days, when if a post was deemed "inappropriate" it got yanked. If a thread went out of control, it got locked. This new system lacks any sense of community or human/humane involvement. Silly me, I thought that's what the forum format was all about.

Oh well, live and learn, I guess.
 
If comments are being hidden after receiving a score of only -2, that's really terrible and egregious. It even discourages me from interacting with the site any further. I understand trialing downvotes, but at least this one "feature" should be reconsidered asap. Like I said before, IMO negative scores should only be used as a tool to aid the moderation staff, with a feature that notifies moderation to check comments below a negative score threshold for possible spam, offensive or offtopic content - even though there's already a "report" button for that.
 
Well, there are a few wrong assumptions being made prematurely, which is precisely my point. We can configure the setup. Right now a comment won't be hidden unless it reaches a -10 score. Also, a given user can't give more than 5 downvotes per day.
 
Well, there are a few wrong assumptions being made prematurely, which is precisely my point. We can configure the setup. Right now a comment won't be hidden unless it reaches a -10 score. Also, a given user can't give more than 5 downvotes per day.
Fine. But if you would be so kind, explain this.We're only at minus 2. :confused:` Granted the post is only hidden, and not removed.

1789851827372.png
 
I miss seeing who specifically liked my posts. Given the total number of voters are typically small, that was a nice touch that helps TechSpot feel more like a real community than say the vastly higher and anonymous numbers to be found on Reddit.

And more generally, I'm not a fan of a single summed upvote + downvote total which obscures how much there was on either side. I don't know if any post ever generates the huge numbers needed to making considering proportionality a requirement, but when configuring say a hard floor of -10 as a bad post, consider that -10 after 10,000 votes means something quite different than -10 after 11 votes.

If there's a desire for expression of negative opinion, maybe we could have a "unliked by..." list to match the old "liked by..."?
 
I miss seeing who specifically liked my posts. Given the total number of voters are typically small, that was a nice touch that helps TechSpot feel more like a real community than say the vastly higher and anonymous numbers to be found on Reddit.
I agree. I think we can easily bring back the list of people that liked/upvoted your post. Should be back soon.

And more generally, I'm not a fan of a single summed upvote + downvote total which obscures how much there was on either side. I don't know if any post ever generates the huge numbers needed to making considering proportionality a requirement, but when configuring say a hard floor of -10 as a bad post, consider that -10 after 10,000 votes means something quite different than -10 after 11 votes.

If the vote volume justifies it, we could add a more granular approach to the data. As for showing who downvoted, the idea is not to initiate a war between members (which as many have pointed out, could happen).

The concept on paper is that if downvoting is limit constrained and nobody will know the who, the incentive to downvote to show a dislike for a member should be less than for a given post/idea. It's an unproven theory, but it's the concept we're working with at the moment. If the system is abused, there are things we can do on the backend without abusers knowing, too.

Ultimately, what we want are users who care enough and want to build up their profiles and reputations over time. The community can also self-moderate on occasion.
 
That was a bug, now fixed. We're still tweaking the system.
Good to know. It's also good to know that it wasn't me making, "a few wrong assumptions being made prematurely,"

Have you considered that 5 down votes a day equals 1825 down votes a year, and 1830 on a leap year?
 
Ultimately, what we want are users who care enough and want to build up their profiles and reputations over time. The community can also self-moderate on occasion.
Feel free to correct me if I'm making, "premature conclusions" (again) but don't we already have this by measuring likes received against posts made?
 
Back