About Downvoting

Stacona·Jul 25, 2014·1 votes·592 views

I need to point out that if you have the need to downvote posts for some reason, please don't as it is poor mannered to do so. Please provide proper feedback first, just because you don't like it doesn't mean others won't, and I would like other people to be able to see posts and not just some troll that likes being mean to others for their own sick amusement. We can be civil in the forums instead of cruelly downvoting posts, if you do not want to be civil in anyway and only want to be mean then DO NOT be in places like the Boards or Forums. That is all for the public service announcement.

~ Stacona

12 Comments

DaenJul 25, 20144 votes

if you have the need to downvote posts for some reason, please don't as it is poor mannered to do so

It's not poor mannered to disagree with someone or otherwise express your displeasure.

just because you don't like it doesn't mean others won't

That's true, which is why a downvote doesn't immediately sink a post. It's just an expression of your opinion on the contents.

I would like other people to be able to see posts and not just some troll that likes being mean to others for their own sick amusement

On the front page of Boards Feedback right now in the Hot category, there are two threads with a net vote of zero and two threads with a negative net vote. It doesn't seem to me that downvotes kill a thread that actually has merit for discussion.

cruelly downvoting posts

Why is the concept of downvoting innately cruel?

Lastly, do you have a solution that is superior to voting? Some of the criteria required for a good system are as follows:

Must empower the community to regulate thread popularity
Must allow the community to quickly remove spam and/or trolling
Must allow the community to express their opinion
Must be easily accessible and unrestrictive

StaconaJul 25, 20141 votes

The only solution is for people to respect people and unless there is a reason why the post needs to be downvoted simply outside of not liking it, just feel like trolling it for their sick amusement, just do not personally agree with it, or just do not like that person are bad reasons to downvote.

If the post was off topic, has inappropriate content, was in place just to bash or mock another individual, was created just to be mean, has negative discussion, has poor language, has over use of bad language, etc. are good reasons to downvote the post.

Point being, as long as the post tries to have something constructive to it then there shouldn't be a need to downvote it just leave feedback to help the main post improve.

DaenJul 25, 20141 votes

The only solution is for people to respect people

Yes.

Do you consider it a problem for people to upvote because they like a post? How about because they agree with a thread? What if they like the person?

StaconaJul 25, 20141 votes

Upvoting is a nice gesture, of course there are abuse cases where people exploit the system by having multiple accounts/people to upvote a post even though the post shouldn't belong in the thread, shouldn't belong in general, has any other kinds of rule breaking, etc.

Just downvoting is a douchey act, and the worst kind if someone is downvoting because they pretty much hate life and want to just see the world burn--- Point being, downvoting should have a strong reasoning behind it and usually follow up with good, constructive feedback to know why they downvoted and for the creator of the post may improve for the future. "Just because" or "you suck" or "this sucks" , etc. are all terrible reasons to downvote.

DaenJul 25, 20141 votes

It's OK to vote positively for the reasons you listed but not to vote negatively for the exact same reasons?

Sir ArmaMalumJul 25, 20143 votes

I think you're generalizing a bit too much. There are legitimate times to downvote a thread, and it largely depends on the thread. If someone has a caps lock rage thread going, no one wants to see that, it's whining and is simply a waste of time to read so I'll downvote it. Similarly if someone is providing what seems to be a good argument but is using falsified information to support their claim, I'll also downvote it. Granted I'll also tell them why, but my point is that just because you're downvoting something doesn't mean it's being done to be hateful towards the OP.

StaconaJul 26, 20141 votes

Rage threads will obviously be downvoted as there is no good material and doesn't serve a purpose- i'm talking about when someone comes and down votes a post just because they do not agree with said change or idea that the author has listed and just down votes regardless how well the ideas were thought about, thought about balancing his own ideas, and wanting to improve the game

Hyrum GraffJul 25, 20141 votes

It's not poor mannered to disagree with someone or otherwise express your displeasure. [...Downvotes are] just an expression of your opinion on the contents.

IMO, a post shouldn't get less visibility just because I disagree with it, if it has a good point, or is a good stepping stone for discussion.

That's true, which is why a downvote doesn't immediately sink a post.
On the front page of Boards Feedback right now in the Hot category, there are two threads with a net vote of zero and two threads with a negative net vote. It doesn't seem to me that downvotes kill a thread that actually has merit for discussion.

Fair enough. But if downvotes are not given much weight, why are they needed at all?

Lastly, do you have a solution that is superior to voting? Some of the criteria required for a good system are as follows:

Must empower the community to regulate thread popularity

Can be accomplished with upvotes alone.

Must allow the community to quickly remove spam and/or trolling

The report button should encompass this function.

Must allow the community to express their opinion

Which can be done via comments, and upvotes on those comments.

Must be easily accessible and unrestrictive

Removing the downvote option doesn't change the accessibility of options at all, with the exception that you now have to comment do express your disagreement. This is a good thing, IMO.

DaenJul 25, 20141 votes

IMO, a post shouldn't get less visibility just because I disagree with it, if it has a good point, or is a good stepping stone for discussion.

Agreed, however the history of reddit and this platform have shown that even threads with significant levels of disagreement remain visible with valid conversation and a well-written OP.

Can be accomplished with upvotes alone.

Without downvotes to balance the upvotes, threads would not reflect dissenting opinions at first glance. What if someone makes an aggressive and unsubstantiated thread and it has 500 people that are opposed but 40 people that upvote the thread? Those 500 people's opinions are completely ignored.

Yes, comments can handle this sort of thing, but there are many situations in which commenting is completely unnecessary or not feasible as a replacement to voting.

The report button should encompass this function.

It could, but the whole point of allowing the players to regulate themselves is that it takes some of the load off Riot. It's also significantly slower to wait for Riot to reach the report in their queue than to mass downvote a comment.

Which can be done via comments, and upvotes on those comments.

We have been over this; commenting is not always feasible or even worth doing. What you are suggesting is essentially replacing downvotes with a comment saying "I don't agree" or "this is clearly spam, why am I being restricted like this".

Removing the downvote option doesn't change the accessibility of options at all, with the exception that you now have to comment do express your disagreement. This is a good thing, IMO.

It is extremely restrictive and actually creates a massive imbalance between positive and negative feedback. If you can show your appreciation with a single click, why can't you show your lack of appreciation with a single click? While we're at it we might as well disable all voting and just return to allowing players to constantly bump threads with spam, because without the ability to counterbalance positivity the system is totally inaccurate.

Here's the thing; the concept of disallowing downvoting is innately assuming that a significant portion of the community will abuse it; you are essentially expecting the worst out of everyone. It's great to have a system that stops this from happening, and realistically speaking voting systems do work to accomplish that. The general population will use voting correctly, some people will occasionally misuse it, and the ones that consistently misuse it will probably get banned or drowned out by everyone else in the community.

PryotraJul 25, 20142 votes

IMO, a post shouldn't get less visibility just because I disagree with it, if it has a good point, or is a good stepping stone for discussion.

Fair enough. But if downvotes are not given much weight, why are they needed at all?

Can be accomplished with upvotes alone.

The report button should encompass this function.

Which can be done via comments, and upvotes on those comments.

Removing the downvote option doesn't change the accessibility of options at all, with the exception that you now have to comment do express your disagreement. This is a good thing, IMO.

Eh, while that sounds good in theory, I don't actually like that solution. Why? 1 word answer here: Circlejerking.

Circlejerking is a viscious cycle, and removing the downvote option makes it unstoppable. Reporting for circlejerk is abuse of the system. Posting only gives the circlejerk even MORE visibility. We want an end to circlejerking, as it destroys conversation.

Now I ask you, why not have a lighter weight on the vote? I'm not saying remove it, but put individual posters in a thread on the same level as upvotes. If I see an up and coming thread that has ~7 unique posters within an hour, that probably should be higher than the +3 rating on a day old thread with only 2 posts. However, if you look around you find this not to be the case.

Honestly, I see nothing positive coming out of removing downvotes, while reducing their impact on visibility seems like a good option to tackle the whole Voting issue.

Hyrum GraffAug 11, 20141 votes

In the past weeks, I've changed my opinion on this issue. What do you think about my new opinion? (respond there, pref)

McKeifusApr 29, 20161 votes

Downvoted. Downvotes are feedback. I don't need to reply to every shitpost or flame or whine on LoL boards. That's what downvotes are for. If you get a lot of downvotes, that means your idea wasn't as good as you thought it was. Welcome to the world! For instance, I will get downvoted for being blunt with you. And that's OK. Because my self-esteem isn't based on how many upvotes/how few downvotes I get on the LoL boards. If yours is, you got bigger probs, bro.