When content is low quality, posted to the wrong community (usually intentionally), trolls. Basically anything that I feel shouldn’t exist. The content that I believe takes value from people’s lives instead of adding it. If I find content that I dislike but believe adds value to other people, well that’s what the block/ban features are for.
Usually it’s a “you’re an asshole” button.
Conflicted here…
I hear you, but I don’t use it. If I disagree with somebody, I use it if they’re disingenuous or rude or disparaging towards other people. Because fuck them.
These days, mostly for reddit mirror bots.
I dunno what people’s obsession is with Lululemon, and I really don’t care, but that fucking bot alone is like 5% of lemmy/all, these days.
The downvote button is the disagree button
So’s your face!
I disagree. Down voted /s
For me it’s “this comment shouldn’t exist” button. Sometimes it’s because it makes the experience of reading worse, regardless of the content of the comment. Sometimes it’s because the content is so bad.
But i don’t just downvote something if I just disagree with it, it should be badBad faith arguments or inflammatory nonsense. We can disagree and I’ll upvote if you’re actually speaking in good faith.
Pretty much any form of, “Whataboutism” gets downvoted. No one was talking about C, why are you acting indignant about C when people were discussing A and B, you know?
I downvote anything that I deem worsens the quality of the community. This includes, but is not limited to:
-
misinformation
-
trolls
-
bad faith engagement
-
uncalled for hostility and incivility
-
very lazy, low effort posts/comments
Perfect! I’d add mindless slogans as well.
“The cruelty is the point!”
Or any of 100 other endlessly repeated replies.
Wouldn’t that just fall to the last bullet point?
Yep! But I particularly hate the repeated slogans.
They’re called cliches btw
-
It’s not a “disagree” button, but it is a “you’re wrong” button. They could be wrong by trolling, spreading misinformation, spamming, being disingenuous, refusing to understand the topic or engage in good faith… None of those contribute to the conversation.
I think making a genuine mistake is fine if it contributes to discussion, especially if it’s later edited to reflect the fact that it was mistaken.
I disagree, so I downvoted you. Guess that’s my answer.
Whatever I want.
I have no obligation to downvote consistently.
I do what I want!
“Disagree”/“its bad”/“eww”
It’s a disagree button. That’s how it’s used in practice, and we’re better off just accepting that.
This is a really nice situation where you can confidently say anyone downvoting you is a hypocrite.
What does that say about the sorting algorithms though? Should we sort posts based on votes then, or should we sort them based on something else? Do we want the posts at the top to be the ones the hivemind agrees most with and the ones the hivemind disagrees with should disappear at the bottom?
Perhaps sorting should be based on total votes and not just downvotes? So downvoting is effectively still “voting” for it, just in a different way. I’m just spitballing here, I find the theory of sort/vote systems fascinating.
I love it and hate it when I write a thoughtful and, at least to me, friendly and persuasive post but because it goes against usual Western narratives (hedonism good, fencesitting as a virtue, truth is flexible, etc) I get a flood of downvotes… but no comments nor arguments against it! Which makes sense: I’ve shaken their house-of-cards ideology and they’re having a gut reaction, but maybe later on they’ll explore what I said and start thinking in earnest about the topic. 🤷🙏
I’m gonna go out on a limb and say the reason you aren’t getting any replies is because you sound full of yourself
That’s probably somewhere there in the mix too, lol. I really try not to too! I’d like to think I sometimes come off more ‘somewhat annoyed’ and sarcastic than prideful, which is closer to reality.
Oi mate, you think that your hot takes are shaking people to their core and that if they don’t agree with you, it’s only because they didn’t think earnestly enough. That’s how you come off, in your own words. That’s the reality.
Hot takes? I mean, yeah, pushing for empathy and being against Western imperialism are probably considered “hot takes”, lol. Listen, I’m not very smart, that’s reserved for lads like Solomon and Wittgenstein, for instance, I’m just sane and somewhat reasonable. A lot of people have never been exposed to that and it can annoy/shock some people enough that it triggers self-examination…
OK bruv “takes” then. That’s the least relevant aspect of the point. … Self examination indeed.
Misinformation, bad attitudes, clichéd jokes
100%. And for me, I downvote every form of unnecessary censorship
I mostly downvote bad faith, hostile or just generally angry/mean comments independent of whether I agree with them or not. Basically I’m using it against the people that are polluting the air here.
