Why are downvotes disabled in gameplay+?

Tychusfindlay918·Aug 24, 2018·27 votes·6,945 views

I could understand moderating certain inappropriate forms of language and what-not to create a balanced discussion, but aren't downvotes meant to provide us with the general feeling of a suggestion from the community? Just as the community upvotes a suggestion it finds warranted, it downvotes suggestions it deems unnecessary or even harmful.

Now if 50 people disagree with the premise of the thread, and only 15 people agree with the premise, the thread is only seen with 15 green upvotes, which skews how the people actually feel about a certain suggestion one of its members came up with.

What could possibly warrant removing downvotes from gameplay+.

Removing downvotes is nothing more than an unnecessary form of censorship, limiting the ways people can express their disapproval of a certain suggestion. Your "quality-checkers" don't make downvoting obsolete, no matter how arrogant you may be.

When movies, games, and even just suggestions in other places are put up for review, there is never only a comments section. There is a voting process, or an "X out of Y stars" in place for a reason. To be arrogant enough to think that you came up with the magical process to remove the necessity of such a system is showing, and gameplay+ is just going to be an echo chamber.

SUGGESTION: Tie upvoting/downvoting to a review or comment. In other words, you can neither upvote nor downvote without having made a comment. It's like most other site with reviews, you give a rating AND provide a comment.

70 Comments

DerMangoJoghurtAug 24, 201812 votes

To quote the gameplay+ rules:

New threads require approval before appearing on the Boards

Boards volunteers will manually review new threads.
Threads that do not adhere to the sub-board guidelines will be removed, and a notification will be sent to your Boards inbox regarding the removal.
Downvoting has been disabled
Due to the thread review process, downvotes will be disabled.
Downvotes are, arguably, intended to filter out content that doesn't foster meaningful discussion; however, the approval process will serve this purpose instead, removing the need for downvotes.

Tychusfindlay918Aug 24, 20188 votes

{quoted}

To quote the gameplay+ rules:

Boards volunteers will manually review new threads.

Threads that do not adhere to the sub-board guidelines will be removed, and a notification will be sent to your Boards inbox regarding the removal.

Downvoting has been disabled

Due to the thread review process, downvotes will be disabled.

Downvotes are, arguably, intended to filter out content that doesn't foster meaningful discussion; however, the approval process will serve this purpose instead, removing the need for downvotes.

Faulty logic, downvotes don't have to equate to filtering out useless discussion, although that is one of their purposes.

Many times people create a suggestion that is well thought out but still poorly received.

Zoe was a deliberate design, but that doesn't stop the community from despising her.

Someone can make a well thought out explanation for why damage isn't high enough, but the community will still receive that poorly because the vast majority of people disagree, and one way they would express such disapproval would be through downvoting.

Now I understand you're just quoting the rules of the sub-board, but I figured I'd just reply to you anyhow.

GlaedrAug 24, 20187 votes

You can explain why you despise something rather than doing a quick zero effort downvote. Mass downvotes completely shut down discussion because the comment gets hidden and pushed down, so why should honest discussion have that?

Tychusfindlay918Aug 24, 20186 votes

{quoted}

You can explain why you despise something rather than doing a quick zero effort downvote. Mass downvotes completely shut down discussion because the comment gets hidden and pushed down, so why should honest discussion have that?

Again, a ludicrously easy fix is to TIE any sort of vote to a comment. If you don't comment you can't vote.

Fondling GemsAug 24, 20182 votes

A logically easy fix does not necessarily result in a technically easy fix. Wuks has definitely done some impressive things with the boards since I was a mod but they still have some hard limitations that he can't get around. It might simply not be possible.

There is also the fact that it would result in an increase in low effort comments, which would hurt the purpose of Gameplay+ significantly. While comments are moderated in Gameplay+, they aren't pre-approved like posts are, so there is no easy way to prevent a flood of low quality comments, even if the tech to tie voting to comments could be implemented.

There are also a lot of people who don't like commenting, Tying all forms of voting to commenting would result in far fewer overall votes, which hurts the visibility of such threads.

Personally I am pretty in the middle on the whole no downvote thing, it has both pros and cons and I am fine with either method. Just wanted to point out that solving one problem can create a host of others.

ProfDrDeathAug 24, 20181 votes

I'd love to see an agree/disagree system independent from votes.

TeCoolMageAug 25, 20181 votes

Gameplay+ threads should get priority over gameplay though, with each vote counting as more since it's simply harder to vote in the first place, but I'd understand Riot's internal staff being like "Haha no, we are NOT hijacking front page like that"

In that case gameplay+ should be more visible as a button than other boards

Edge of DaybreakAug 24, 20183 votes

I would 100% support this if people couldn't just say something like commented to downvote or in the worse case just type a "." and nothing else. All it would do is clutter things as you haven't forced people to make a real argument you have just made it so they have to type something. Now for lazier people this would probably be a deterrent.

My Waifu VanillaAug 24, 20185 votes

That's what moderators are for. Gameplay+ is "supposedly" a HEAVILY moderated forum. If the comment adds nothing to the discussion it gets removed as well as whatever vote is associated with it.

TeCoolMageAug 25, 20181 votes

This sounds like a decent, but change the visuals across the board (heh) regarding upvotes and downvotes, especially considering they'll play different roles between boards: Gameplay - should be quality Gameplay+ - since quality is regulated by mods, agree and disagree (it's funny how these two are reversed when they really shouldn't be) Memes & games - funniness GD - whatever

It has to be made clear what upvotes and downvotes are used for, and the very appearance of the buttons matters. Gameplay+ should probably even not use the same layout/format, instead of putting vote buttons next to the original post's profile picture, they should be put onto the comment you're writing (since it's locked behind writing comments).

Also 1 agree does not cancel out 1 disagree as opposed to a more binary separation like "spam" and "not spam", most people will agree on what is low quality but there are varying reasons for agree-disagree on the opinion of the comment. So in Gameplay+ I think they should make the hover-over counter the default counter, which is Upvotes | downvotes. AND controversial is the default 'sort by' option rather than 'best' which would be awesome and encourage tons of discussion

One thing that would be worth considering but I haven't thought out the potential side effects is a "good point!" system counter. Doesn't count towards agreeing/disagreeing but rather it counts towards the the weight of the vote the comment is replying to, so if person A has an opinion and person B has a counterargument, you can give person B a 'good point!' and it increases the weight of their vote. It takes more than 3 people to increase the weight, people who also agree and give a point have drastically less effect (Maybe even none), people who disagree but recognize it as a good point have a much much bigger effect. So you if you want to game the system you might as well just make your own comment as it has a larger effect anyway

DerMangoJoghurtAug 24, 20183 votes

But that's not what downvotes are meant to do, even though most people use them that way.

Showing disagreement without any explanation as to why you feel that way doesn't help anyone. Discussions require constructive feedback. Sure, Zoe is controversial at best, but what do you think will actually help to resolve her issues? A mountain of contextless downvotes or comments explaining why it feels frustrating to play against her?

SEKAIAug 24, 20181 votes

{quoted}

Sure, Zoe is controversial at best, but what do you think will actually help to resolve her issues? A mountain of contextless downvotes or comments explaining why it feels frustrating to play against her?

It's like the paper crane thing, you know. Like in the Japanese folk belief where folding 1000 paper cranes and string them up will be granted a wish by gods (most used in the context of wishing someone to recover from their illness).

So if we net enough downvotes, maybe the gods would tell Riot to delete this cancer from the game. Maybe..

Edge of DaybreakAug 24, 20181 votes

Except that it's just not going to happen. We've been at this game for over 7 years and we have seen 0 things deleted just because people didn't like them. Why do people think it would suddenly start as if they can wear riot down? Worse the argument is usually summarized to I don't like X delete it. Can you imagine how empty this game would be if things got removed on that premise alone we would probably just have a client and no other features until the client itself was requested to be deleted.

TeCoolMageAug 25, 20181 votes

well there's the assassin rework reverts.

While people can say it's because of design problem x, it's still very much a large part by their mains and would not have happened without complaining.

But other than that I agree - because Riot doesn't use boards, this was majority by mains subreddits, streamers and everyone else. I think a lot of boards users disagreed with rework revert at the time LOL but to this day say "a perfect example of riot being incompetent"

Edge of DaybreakAug 24, 20189 votes

It's refreshing to see it removed. Now people have to actually provide a counter argument instead of going I'm downvoting you because I dislike X thing but don't have a logical reason why.

BLIGHTBRINGERAug 24, 20184 votes

I can't agree more with you on that, well said.

Tychusfindlay918Aug 24, 20183 votes

[{quoted}](name=Darkin Hybrid,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=WLKecAF9,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2018-08-24T14:02:31.623+0000)

I can't agree more with you on that, well said.

See, instead of replying with nonsense that does nothing to further the discussion, you simply could have upvoted him to bring that point across. The same goes for the reverse, and hence why the reverse should also be allowed.

Edge of DaybreakAug 24, 20182 votes

How does downvoting or upvoting with no reply further the discussion? The only thing that furthers the discussion is an actual reply. The issue is people aren't using the downvote system for its intended purpose and it makes gameplay awful to go through. I for one don't see why downvotes still minimize your post when part of the time the person downvoted isn't posting some low quality thing they just disagreed with thread and even though their argument was sound usually more sound than the ones supporting it they are at like -40 or more because hey you said otherwise.

Tychusfindlay918Aug 25, 20181 votes

{quoted}

How does downvoting or upvoting with no reply further the discussion? The only thing that furthers the discussion is an actual reply. The issue is people aren't using the downvote system for its intended purpose and it makes gameplay awful to go through. I for one don't see why downvotes still minimize your post when part of the time the person downvoted isn't posting some low quality thing they just disagreed with thread and even though their argument was sound usually more sound than the ones supporting it they are at like -40 or more because hey you said otherwise.

You might want to learn how to read. Look at my post in context and you'll see it has nothing to do with how downvoting or upvoting furthers a discussion, but rather condenses discussions by cutting out potential redundancy.

The post I quoted literally said nothing other than "yeah dude I agree."

It was therefore an unnecessary post and its idea could have been conveyed with a simple upvote.

READING COMPREHENSION 101 nice dude.

ChermorgAug 24, 20188 votes

No, in fact, that's the exact reason they're disabled. Voting is not " I agree with this ", voting should be used to show you think a post is well written (or not). Unfortunately, having downvotes enabled on G+ would hinder that use of voting as people would dislike a well written and logical idea just because they personally don't like it.

If you don't think a comment needs boosted, simply don't upvote it

FeuerfalkeFXAug 24, 20182 votes

Voting is not " I agree with this ", voting should be used to show you think a post is well written (or not).

Then give us another option of showing wether we agree or disagree with what the person writes. You simply can't have a proper discussion in an online forum about something when there is no way of showing the (dis)agreement. Sure, you could technically write a comment, but if hundreds of people see something having the only option to show (dis)agreement be writing a comment is awful. Only because I agree with something does not mean I have something to say about it. And while it would certainly be nice to explain why you disagree with someone, one often does not have the time to do so (when I browse the boards on my phone I am not going to write an essay on why I disagree with someone) nor am I willing to write a proper answer when the person said something like "I feel like Darius ultimate should do 100 more damage at all ranks". It is obvious why it's a bad idea and I shouldn't be forced to write a reply to show my disagreement.

Additional, people will NOT use the system like you want them to. They will still use it as a "I like this" instead of a "This is well written".

ChermorgAug 24, 20185 votes

That's what comments and discussion are for. This isn't a vote for your favorite idea website. It is a discussion board. Agreement means nothing if you aren't going to discuss.

Put bluntly, the gameplay+ board is for people who are willing to spend the time to discuss. It sounds like you may be better off sticking to the original gameplay board if you're unwilling to put in the time to form an opinion, justify it, and discuss it

FeuerfalkeFXAug 24, 20181 votes

It sounds like you may be better off sticking to the original gameplay board if you're unwilling to put in the time to form an opinion, justify it, and discuss it

EXCUSE ME WHAT. The ONLY time I said that I am unwilling to put time and effort into an answer is when I mentioned being on my phone which you can NOT blame me for, or when the context of the comment in question is so stupid that you start thinking the writer was drunk while posting it.

And yes I took that a bit personal.

Agreement means nothing if you aren't going to discuss.

And a discussion means nothing without a result. If you provide a feature that allows the creator of the discussion to close it and add a final summary I am totally fine with removing the old voting system, since it added a lot of biased before even reading the comment. But until then the voting system is the only thing we have. You just can't expect from people to go through a discussion with dozens of comments, each having the possibility of being multiple pages in size so they can understand what the players want and what not. There has to be a quick way to find that out and as for now the only thing we have are up and down votes.

5050BSSep 6, 20181 votes

And yet 90% of the users use it as a Agree/disagree

SEKAIAug 24, 20187 votes

Downvotes have 1 problem: The entire direction of the post is usually dependent on who discovered the post first.

Even if you don't weaponise the voting, plenty will, and whoever discovers a post first can either upvote it into the heavens or downvotes into obscurity, the same goes for any of the replies within the thread. In other words, whoever discovers the post before anyone else usually can dictate what's being said in the post as well as its direction, because any potential repliers might be downvoted out of the thread for having a different point of view to the whoever that is "setting the scene", and they just don't bother to participate or reply anymore. This is also kinda why you see threads with clearly contradictory ideas can both be upvoted, and expressing the same opinion in 1 thread might give you a lot of likes but a ton of dislikes in another.

Or in another words, downvote is what create the echo chamber, and not really the upvotes. Because downvotes pressures out any and all challengers to the established scenery of any post.

As such, if Riot is going to make Gameplay+ as the place where "only intellectual discussions are held" then it makes sense to take downvote out of there. Assuming Riot's authentication process on what goes on the Gameplay+ Board is legit and fair, that is.

......

EDIT: Though I must stress, upvotes form echo chambers too. But I'd say less so than downvotes. If Riot has to be perfectly fair then they should remove voting altogether in Gameplay+, but hey, gotta have something to see if an idea is popular after all.

Tychusfindlay918Aug 24, 20182 votes

{quoted}

Downvotes have 1 problem: The entire direction of the post is dependent on who discovered the post first.

Even if you don't weaponise the voting, plenty will, and whoever discovers a post first can either upvote it into the heavens or downvotes into obscurity, the same goes for any of the replies within the thread. In other words, whoever discovers the post before anyone else usually can dictate what's being said in the post as well as its direction, because any potential repliers might be downvoted out of the thread for having a different point of view to the whoever that is "setting the scene", and they just don't bother to participate or reply anymore. This is also kinda why you see threads with clearly contradictory ideas can both be upvoted, and expressing the same opinion in 1 thread might give you a lot of likes but a ton of dislikes in another.

Or in another words, downvote is what create the echo chamber, and not really the upvotes.

As such, if Riot is going to make Gameplay+ as the place where "only intellectual discussions are held" then it makes sense to take downvote out of there. Assuming Riot's authentication process on what goes on the Gameplay+ Board is legit and fair, that is.

There's no such thing as downvoting into obscurity since gameplay+ is so selective to begin with and there are too few threads.

And if the moderators were clever, they would create an archive where old threads are placed to keep the actual gameplay+ boards down to only one page at any given time, removing the fear of having your thread become instantly obscure by going into that "past the first page" section.

An unpopular suggestion must be allowed to be seen as such, no matter how much it may hurt your feelings.

SEKAIAug 24, 20183 votes

{quoted}

There's no such thing as downvoting into obscurity since gameplay+ is so selective to begin with and there are too few threads.

And if the moderators were clever, they would create an archive where old threads are placed to keep the actual gameplay+ boards down to only one page at any given time, removing the fear of having your thread become instantly obscure by going into that "past the first page" section.

An unpopular suggestion must be allowed to be seen as such, no matter how much it may hurt your feelings.

No one is talking about "feelings".

I was simply stating that downvotes are often weaponised to push challengers (either against OP, or the whoever that took over the thread with supreme authority) out and to create echo chambers; hence why the removal of downvotes can be good in a sense that no one would feel being gutted into submission whenever they try to argue in a post, and so it actually encourages disagreements and further debates. I mean, there is a reason why for the sake of integrity, participants and audience of a debate aren't allowed to boo at and mob the other participants.

I also further added in an EDIT that I do express upvotes can be just as toxic as downvotes, but at least it is the lesser evil of the 2, which might be why Riot decided to keep it in Gameplay+. I also stated that if Riot would be utterly fair and reasonable, they would actually remove voting entirely from Gemeplay+, but I gave them some benefits of the doubt because you still ultimately need to see if something is of popular appeal/demand/opinion.

Tychusfindlay918Aug 24, 20182 votes

{quoted}

No one is talking about "feelings".

I was simply stating that downvotes are often weaponised to push challengers (either against OP, or the whoever that took over the thread with supreme authority) out and to create echo chambers; hence why the removal of downvotes can be good in a sense that no one would feel being gutted into submission whenever they try to argue in a post, and so it actually encourages disagreements and debates. I mean, there is a reason why for the sake of integrity, participants and audience of a debate aren't allowed to boo at and mob the other participants.

I also further added in an EDIT that I do express upvotes can be just as toxic as downvotes, but at least it is the lesser evil of the 2, which might be why Riot decided to keep it in Gameplay+. I also stated that if Riot would be utterly fair and reasonable, they would actually remove voting entirely from Gemeplay+, but I gave them some benefits of the doubt because you still ultimately need to see if something is of popular appeal.

If the idea is forced discussion is good, then tie all votes of either nature to a comment. No comment, no vote.

SEKAIAug 24, 20184 votes

{quoted}

If the idea is forced discussion is good, then tie all votes of either nature to a comment. No comment, no vote.

Not forced discussion. I was saying that an environment without downvote mobbing encourages discussion. Sure, upvotes can probably do just as much in terms of pushing out competing opinions/ideas, but I'd be willing to bet it won't be nearly as bad as downvotes apart from the absolute extremes.

Also I'm sure there are other ways to play around it, but I think "No comment, no vote." is probably a bit simplistic, and creates the issue of spam posts and thread bloating more than anything. But hey.

EedatAug 24, 20186 votes

Because downvoting doesnt accomplish any of the things you said it does lol. You can have a very well thought out, detailed post that actually makes sense but uh-oh! Its about Zed! -10. Meanwhile "REEEEEEEEEEEEEEE DELETE YASUO! RIOT IS ACTUALLY FUCKING RETARDED FOR MAKING YASUO GUISE!!!!!" +100 on the front page.

All downvotes actually do is create a massive circlejerk. Only the pre-approved opinions get to be viewed over and over and over and over and over and anything that goes against them is downvoted into oblivion and never seen again. Notice how I said "pre-approved" opinions and not "popular" opinions. This board does NOT reflect the popular opinion of the entire community. This board is a tiny fraction of a fraction of the community. This board's pre-approved circlejerks don't even line up with the main Reddit which by itself is a small faction although much larger than this one.

Let's be honest. The Gameplay board is complete and utter trash. It does not reflect the opinion of the community. It's riddled with complete garbage, zero effort shitposts getting recycled fucking HUNDREDS of times. Threads that are thought out and well written almost always get downvoted into oblivion while the front page is littered with what should be considered shitposts. The Reddit makes fun of how shit this board is. Streamers make fun of how shit this board is. The other boards on this very forum make fun of how shit this board is.

BLIGHTBRINGERAug 24, 20185 votes

To stop negativity abuse, as well as any low quality posts don't even get posted on that section (since all posts get checked by the boards volunteers). So the downvoting feature isn't needed there.

Tychusfindlay918Aug 24, 20184 votes

[{quoted}](name=Darkin Hybrid,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=WLKecAF9,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2018-08-24T13:59:11.303+0000)

To stop negativity abuse, as well as any low quality posts don't even get posted on that section (since all posts get checked by the boards volunteers). So the downvoting feature isn't needed there.

Why do downvotes ONLY mean non-quality posts in your eyes?

Have you forgotten that they can express disapproval of the premise of the thread as well? I've seen gigantic text walls from people trying their best to make an argument that happens to be unpopular, and while those OPs are civil, use their intellect, and express their views intelligently, the views themselves are unpopular among the community, and so they are downvoted.

ModWulf HelhammerAug 24, 20186 votes

Have you forgotten that they can express disapproval of the premise of the thread as well

Because that's not what they are supposed to mean.

The purpose of downvoting is to filter out low quality content, not to express disapproval. Now, we are all guilty of using them for that purpose, but that doesn't mean we should support it.

I've seen gigantic text walls from people trying their best to make an argument that happens to be unpopular, and while those OPs are civil, use their intellect, and express their views intelligently, the views themselves are unpopular among the community, and so they are downvoted.

And that's precisely why we removed downvotes from GP+. We want it to be a place of serious discussion. Downvoting something just because you disagree with it defeats that entire purpose.

Tychusfindlay918Aug 24, 20183 votes

{quoted}

Because that's not what they are supposed to mean.

The purpose of downvoting is to filter out low quality content, not to express disapproval. Now, we are all guilty of using them for that purpose, but that doesn't mean we should support it.

And that's precisely why we removed downvotes from GP+. We want it to be a place of serious discussion. Downvoting something just because you disagree with it defeats that entire purpose.

Downvoting doesn't defeat that purpose, and the purpose of downvoting isn't only to remove low quality content.

All you've done is create an echo chamber where no opinion is necessarily unpopular.

It's like removing the "X/5 stars" on reviews and allowing only comments. Not a single legitimate board or institution responsible for reviewing people, places, or suggestions does that.

ModWulf HelhammerAug 24, 20186 votes

Downvoting doesn't defeat that purpose, and the purpose of downvoting isn't only to remove low quality content.

Yes, it is. No matter how many times you say it, that will not change, You are not supposed to express your dislike or disagreement with something through downvoting and leaving. You are supposed to show why you disagree with it, what makes it a bad idea in your eyes. If you can't do that, then you leave the thread alone.

An opinion backed by logic cannot, by definition, be wrong. It is a personal belief. If someone has the evidence to support it, then that opinion is valid. If you disagree with it, then show them why. Use your own argumentation methods, your own evidence and logic. You don't just get to walk up to them and way "You're wrong and I said so".

Downvotes aren't a rating system. They aren't supposed to be a measure of community appeal.

Tychusfindlay918Aug 24, 20184 votes

{quoted}

Yes, it is. No matter how many times you say it, that will not change, You are not supposed to express your dislike or disagreement with something through downvoting and leaving. You are supposed to show why you disagree with it, what makes it a bad idea in your eyes. If you can't do that, then you leave the thread alone.

An opinion backed by logic cannot, by definition, be wrong. It is a personal belief. If someone has the evidence to support it, then that opinion is valid. If you disagree with it, then show them why. Use your own argumentation methods, your own evidence and logic. You don't just get to walk up to them and way "You're wrong and I said so".

Downvotes aren't a rating system. They aren't supposed to be a measure of community appeal.

Then the LOGICAL thing to do would be to restrict voting to those who commented.

Tie the vote itself to a comment.

It's like any of the other legitimate websites where the review process is two-fold, an upvote/downvote or rating out of X stars combined with a comment.

Well done for not quoting and addressing the whole post as well. The community won't take gameplay+ seriously when you make it an echo chamber.

Why should a person be able to upvote without commenting?

ZT XperimentorSep 1, 20181 votes

"Downvotes aren't a rating system. They aren't supposed to be a measure of community appeal." Then why don't the forums show both upvotes & downvotes instead of this net vote all the time? Until riot changes that, actual discussions are always going to be buried under meme & bandwagon posts.

haaaaaaalpSep 1, 20181 votes

[{quoted}](name=ZT Xperimentor,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=WLKecAF9,comment-id=000300000000000000000001,timestamp=2018-09-01T00:51:26.793+0000)

"Downvotes aren't a rating system. They aren't supposed to be a measure of community appeal." Then why don't the forums show both upvotes & downvotes instead of this net vote all the time? Until riot changes that, actual discussions are always going to be buried under meme & bandwagon posts.

Meme and bandwagon posts tend to get buried with the upcoming and down voting post. The regular gameplay section already does a good job at keeping the most pressing issues at the top.

Gameplay+ was created to filter out low effort posts but it still needs a way to sort through pressing issues. A post that goes in depth on a less important issue deserves a place on gameplay+ but there shouldn't crowd out discussions on more important topics.

ZT XperimentorSep 6, 20181 votes

Except for the repeat/similar posts which clog it up, from people trying to farm popularity. From what I've seen about the plus, it still suffers from the same 'most picked topic sticks' whether or not it's actually a worthwhile discussion. Seems to me like they're bandaiding the issue instead of working on the forums, again.

Modl Ryden lAug 24, 20185 votes

The average boards user: "I don't like what I just read, even if it's a solid argument. I downvote!"

Comment containing solid argument: "Comment below threshold." (click to view)

Other average boards user: "Wow, that comment was downvoted to oblivion, it must have been a shitty comment and that person probably has no idea what they were talking about."

Edit:

And if it hasn't been noticed by your post alone (I'm not criticizing your post) but downvoting is a passive way for users to express opinion. Like yes it's a disagreement but in what context? Did they downvote because they don't like the player? Which is what a lot of players will do. Did they downvote because they read the headline and disagreed without reading the full extent of the OP? Did they downvote because they have nothing better to do? Did they downvote because your post about Zed is weak went against the fact they just got shit on by a Zed 3 minutes ago on an ARAM?

I believe Gameplay+ was made so players that want to get a point across can get achieve that without having to fight this uphill battle of the possibility to be censored by mass downvotes of frustrated players. If you agree, then you agree. So upvote! If you disagree then give your opinion and reasons as to why. This generates discussion rather than passively disapproving what you have to say.

After all it's a discussion board right? So let there be discussion.

ModKnightsKemplarAug 24, 20184 votes

The gradient that you say we're losing is still there.

Threads can have 15 upvotes instead of 80 upvotes, and that tells you the same information. You don't need both upvotes and downvotes, since they both effectively do the same thing.

The reason we removed downvotes is because of this thread's topic; we're not interested in GP+ being a place where you can shame someone for having a lot of downvotes. That runs counter to the purpose of the sub-board in every way. Downvotes often serve as a distraction from the actual topic. Sometimes, lots of downvotes can make an impression on someone and be useful, but we're trying something different for GP+. We don't want it to be the same as the other sub-boards.

If it becomes apparent that the loss of downvotes is a problem, we would absolutely consider adding them back. In order for you to convince me, though, I'm going to want specific examples of how it's taking away from the the purpose of GP+. Right now, I don't see an echo chamber. I see people having dynamic discussions that are somewhat different from the typical GP experience (with some exceptions). If we discovered, down the line, that it has become an echo chamber, we would make changes accordingly.

Linna ExcelAug 24, 20181 votes

So why not get rid of downvotes across the forums as a whole?

ModKnightsKemplarAug 24, 20183 votes

Personally? I would love to.

But I'm not interested in forcing that opinion on people. I wouldn't want to to force that opinion on OP, for instance, who clearly values downvotes. Despite what many people think, we do actually care what the forum users want, not just our own opinions :P

You can make a strong argument that downvotes are a good thing. It's a "non-verbal" way to communicate on the Boards. Even on Gameplay, having a bad idea get downvoted into oblivion makes an impression, doesn't it?

I restricted my argument for GP+ specifically because I really do believe it's more about whether or not that kind of communication is good on that particular sub-board. The parties involved agreed that it wouldn't fit the type of discussion that we were trying to foster there. GP+ shouldn't be viewed as a better gameplay. They serve different purposes, and the differences in voting reflect that.

Tychusfindlay918Aug 25, 20181 votes

{quoted}

Personally? I would love to.

But I'm not interested in forcing that opinion on people like to OP. Despite what many people think, we do actually care what the forum users want, not just our own opinions :P

You can make a strong argument that downvotes are a good thing. It's a "non-verbal" way to communicate on the Boards. Even on Gameplay, having a bad idea get downvoted into oblivion makes an impression, doesn't it?

I restricted my argument for GP+ specifically because I really do believe it's more about whether or not that kind of communication is good on that particular sub-board. The parties involved agreed that it wouldn't fit the type of discussion that we were trying to foster there. GP+ shouldn't be viewed as a better gameplay. They serve different purposes, and the differences in voting reflect that.

"like to op"

Nice grammar cowboy, and me forcing my opinion on others? I'm not the one who went and did away with a tool that nearly everyone on the boards uses.

ModKnightsKemplarAug 25, 20181 votes

I think that grammar error caused a misunderstanding.

That's supposed to say "like the op," which is my mistake. I'm saying I think your opinion is valid and I wouldn't want to force mine onto you. Downvotes in other sub-boards can be good. I just don't think they fit on GP+.

Made an edit up there that should make my meaning more clear :)

DerMangoJoghurtAug 24, 20184 votes

It's ironic that half of the comments explain how feedback should be used to show disagreement instead of downvotes, and yet this post already received 8 downvotes even though it's a valid discussion.