Require a comment to enable up/downvote.

Camphene·Jul 21, 2014·3 votes·788 views

Anonymous upvote/downvotes are bad for discussion.

15 Comments

Boots3PotsJul 21, 20145 votes

I disagree. We don't need to be forced to comment on a troll/spam thread just to be able to downvote it. Besides, the amount of comments in a thread is one of the things that determines what's "hot". It'd mess with the algorithms.

CampheneJul 21, 20142 votes

If you're going to express an opinion by down voting something you should be forced to defend yourself instead of hiding behind anonymity.

CampheneJul 21, 20141 votes

Good job anonymous coward. Good. Job.

DaenJul 25, 20141 votes

You realize you just replied to yourself with this particular comment, right?

Hyrum GraffJul 21, 20143 votes

I think this is an issue with downvotes themselves, not whether you also have to comment.

GranspearZXJul 21, 20141 votes

I'd have to agree here. Although I'm curious about the train of thought required to think other people owe others an explanation--or owe anyone anything, for that matter--over the Internet... that seems like another subject for another thread.

Downvotes tend not to indicate anything about the actual substance of the topic being discussed. Rather, they don't give any real insight as to what's going on in the actual topic; I'd definitely support removing it from the main page so that people actually READ what's contained within first.

JedditeFTWJul 21, 20144 votes

What this forum needs is more "Posting to downvote the OP" comments. Definitely.

Funnily enough, that's what I'm doing -- since that's being requested in this thread. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

CampheneJul 21, 20142 votes

You didn't bring anything constructive to the discussion. Downvoted.

If this was a legit mode and someone else agreed with me then your downvote would be revoked. Likewise, if someone disagreed with me then mine would.

Hyrum GraffJul 21, 20145 votes

I disagree that Jeddite didn't add anything constructive to the conversation - he raises a good point: requiring a comment to downvote doesn't get rid of the problems with downvotes - it just creates more spam posts.

The same is true if I like your post: "Posted to upvote the OP" is just as much spam as the negative one.

If this was a legit mode and someone else agreed with me then your downvote would be revoked.

This seems like a recipe for circlejerk to me. Imagine:

I make original post
10 people upvote me
9 people downvote each of them
The same 9 people downvote me
The same 10 people downvote them
The 9 people's downvotes get revoked
Original post has a score of +10, even though the conversation is mostly equal.

Essentially, the problem is that you're still letting people anonymously up- and down-vote people's comments - it doesn't solve the issue, just hides it behind a level of comments.

KingSmizzyJul 21, 20141 votes

No, they are an indicator that someone has read and disagrees with the statements you made. They might not have a comment to make but they can still express their opinion through that system.

Boots3PotsJul 21, 20141 votes

No, they are an indicator that someone has read and disagrees with the statements you made.

No... they're not. The downvote button isn't a disagree button. You may disagree with "I think Lee Sin is too strong, here are my ideas to nerf him blah blah blah", but that doesn't mean it should be downvoted. Things like that generate discussion and that's the point of forums. Attempting to silence those opinions and prevent that discussion just because you don't agree isn't cool, yo.

This is a great example of why many people dislike comment voting.

CampheneJul 21, 20142 votes

Even though there's a "rule" that the downvote button isn't a disagree button 99.5% of users are going to use it like that.

CampheneJul 21, 20142 votes

Case in point. 0 points to be precise since this comment was downvoted without a comment or explanation.

DaenJul 25, 20141 votes

This becomes a pretty difficult issue. How do you empower the community to regulate thread popularity based upon interest rather than agreement and still allow players to show their appreciation/lack thereof?

Moreover, is it necessarily a bad thing that the most accepted threads move to the top? As an example, let's say someone makes a "nerf Irelia" thread, but it is well-substantiated with data and other clear reasoning. I love Irelia and I adore her concept, so technically I would disagree with this thread. However, it's very well thought out and offers a great medium for discussion, so I would likely either not vote on it at all or upvote it to get more attention into the thread.

The entire community will not follow a set of 'desirable' rules unless they are enforced in some way. The issue becomes enforcing these desirable rules in a way that doesn't feel arbitrary or restrictive to the users of the system.

Hyrum GraffJul 21, 20141 votes

Seems like you've acquired yourself a downvote fairy. Even though I disagree with your post, I've been an upvote fairy for you, to even it out, because I think there's good discussion to be had. (And, I'll say, this is another case in point: downvotes stifle good discussion).