this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2023
16 points (100.0% liked)

/kbin meta

25 readers
1 users here now

Magazine dedicated to discussions about the kbin itself. Provide feedback, ask questions, suggest improvements, and engage in conversations related to the platform organization, policies, features, and community dynamics. ---- * Roadmap 2023 * m/kbinDevlog * m/kbinDesign

founded 2 years ago
 

Right now, downvotes (reduces) don't federate to (and from?) Kbin instances. This lack of federation makes the downvote counter really inaccurate—a comment that looks like it's +10 might be -15 when you look at it from lemmy.world.

This leaves me with a few questions:

  • Is downvote federation going to be implemented?
  • If so, is it a priority or something that'll happen much further down the line?
  • If not, will downvoting be removed?
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ThatOneKirbyMain2568@kbin.social 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (32 children)

Thanks for the response, Ernest!

This is a good time to start a discussion on how it should work on kbin.social

A while back, I made a thread on /m/AskKbin about this. While it's not solely kbin.social users, there's still a lot of good input, and you could use KES to sort through those who are and aren't on the instance if you want. My two cents are that it's important for downvotes to exist, be federated, and be shown separately so that (A) people can easily express that they feel something doesn't helpfully contribute to the discussion and (B) similar expressions from other instances aren't drowned out.

Downvote federation only applies to remote threads from other instances, without affecting local threads

To be clear, what exactly do you mean by this? Does this mean that downvote federation is one-way (i.e., that downvotes federate from Kbin instances but not to Kbin instances)?

EDIT: Fixed quote formatting.

[–] CoffeeAddict@kbin.social 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (30 children)

I understand what you are saying here, and I have flip-flopped on the issue myself. At the moment I personally am a fan of the limited downvote federation because I do think it acts as a hivemind barrier; to use reddit as an example, as it got bigger the downvote was used as a means to disagree without adding any value to the discussion or to simply silence a dissenting point of view.

That is not to say there were not times when a downvote was warranted - hateful comments, racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, and general bigotry are all more than deserving of a downvote. There are also bots and general off-topic posts & comments that may warrant a downvote.

Overall though, I think the problem is how the downvote was used (on Reddit, at least) was not conducive to discussion. However, due to the fact that upvotes and downvotes are public on kbin it is possible that behavior could change, but then that could create problems with other instances where none of that information is public to begin with. (Nobody wants to have a crazy person come after them over a downvote.)

Right now, the fediverse is pretty small and Kbin is actually the most welcoming instance I have found so far. I am not sure if the lack of downvote federation has anything to do with this, but so far I actually like it. Maybe once kbin and the expanded fediverse grows larger my opinion will change, but right now I feel like it’s helping to make it more hospitable than reddit.

Edit: grammar and clarity

[–] ThatOneKirbyMain2568@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago (11 children)

At the moment I personally am a fan of the limited downvote federation because I do think it acts as a hivemind barrier;

I think it's a lot less straightforward than this. While it definitely drowns out the "hivemind" of the wider fediverse, it also creates a bubble within your own instance. If a lot of people outside of your instance think you made a bad comment but few inside your instance do, limited downvote federation creates an inaccurate representation of what people think.

Additionally, having downvotes but limiting their federation makes them extremely unintuitive and only serves to further confuse new users. It's actively misleading—you'd think that if you see 0 downvotes that nobody clicked the downvote button, but that might actually be 5 people or 10 people or 30 people. At least if you don't have a downvote counter at all, it's clear that downvote functionality just isn't recognized on the instance. I'd much prefer that over a straight up incorrect counter.

Overall though, I think the problem is how the downvote was used (on Reddit, at least) was not conducive to discussion.

I agree that there's a big problem with how downvotes are used. I personally use downvotes if something is:

  • spam
  • straight up hateful
  • completely off-topic
  • a nonsensical take that the poster doesn't support

In other words, if something isn't a reasonable contribution to the discussion, I'll likely downvote it.

However, lots of people seem to use the downvote button as a disagree button. I see this less on kbin.social than I do on other instances, and that could be a potential reason to not federate downvotes. If downvotes are used differently on kbin.social than on other instances, then I can see it making sense to not lump them all together. However, that only makes sense if people on kbin.social aren't using the downvote button as a disagree button (which they are, just less so than on other instances). And even still, there's the problem of an unfederated downvote counter still being misleading.

Rambling aside, I see three ways of handling this:

  1. Remove the downvote button entirely.
  2. Remove the downvote button, but replace it with reactions that people can use ("This is spam," "This is hateful", "This doesn't contribute to the discussion," etc.). If other instances adopt this set of reactions, reactions from those instances could federate.
  3. Keep the downvote button and federate downvotes.

I don't like #1 very much because then you don't have a great way of indicating spam, hateful posts, unhelpful comments, etc. outside of reports that only moderators can see. #2 seems really nice, though both it and #1 come with the downside of filtering out negative feedback from instances with downvotes. #3 is also good, though it comes with the problems of downvote misuse.

[–] cacheson@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Might be interesting to have per-instance weighted voting. So local votes would count as 1x, votes from other instances could count as 0.5x, and votes from that one instance that has a lot of vote brigading would count as 0x. Would be useful for smaller, specialized instances that tend to get harassed by outsiders.

[–] ThatOneKirbyMain2568@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Like you mentioned, that could be interesting for specialized instances used by a small group of people, but that wouldn't work for any general instance due to the vote counters being really unintuitive. If an instance were to do that, I imagine they'd also want to have something you can click that shows how many votes were local, how many were from other instances, how many were blocked, etc.

[–] cacheson@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago

I imagine they'd also want to have something you can click that shows how many votes were local, how many were from other instances, how many were blocked, etc.

Actually, that would be really cool and worth doing regardless. Have a voting statistics view for each post where upvotes and downvotes are broken down per instance, and maybe by other criteria too. @ernest

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (27 replies)
load more comments (28 replies)