Ask Lemmy

Upvoting: I like this post or it adds to the discussion/community (I want to see more of this)

Downvoting: This is spam, off topic, etc. or the poster is being an arse (in general, I want to see less of this)

Simple as.

Upvote: contributes positively to the discussion, hasnt been said before in the same thread, well researched/high effort

Downvote: trolling, obvious/overdone, bad/disingenuous reasoning, spreads misinformation, bigotry/sexism

"Do you wish there were more content like this?" Upvote.

"Do you wish there were less content like this?" Downvote.

I downvote for people being assholes (trolling, bigotry, ad hominem, etc), spreading misinformation, or making comments which don't add to the conversation ("This.", "This is the way."), and rarely for anything else.

I upvote content that I find interesting, educational, funny, etc. I also upvote people for being polite and willing to admit to being incorrect ("Thanks for the information, I didn't know that", etc).

I like this: upvote

I don't like this: downvote

Up: more people should read this

Down: less people should have to read this

I tend to agree about the down cote it if you disagree with it. I tend to just leave the thread or try not to comment to avoid silly online arguments.

However, if I read something posted that is obviously misleading or someone is just outright lying, then downvote away!

I tend to upvote if someone brings something unique to the discussion. If you're just giving a quick generic response to OP or parroting the same opinion a dozen other people in the thread have already posted, then I'm gonna read your comment and keep going. But if you provide thoughtful content that promotes discussion, provides a unique perspective, or at least had a lot of thought put into it, I'm likely to upvote it. Same goes for the post itself.

I generally avoid downvoting, even if I disagree with the comment. But if someone is factually wrong, misleading, posting in bad faith, or just being a troll, I'll downvote their comments in a thread and upvote anyone who attempts to be reasonable with them. If two people are just bickering back and forth, they both get downvotes. And as always, any comments that distract from the discussion or are off-topic will get a downvote.

Upvote for funny posts, posts that contribute to the discussion even if they drift a bit off topic, and anything that promotes positivity.

No upvotes/downvites for things I disagree with that are just differences in opinions, or something that is trying to be funny but doesn't work for me. Also posts I just don't understand or understand the context.

Downvotes for people being jerks, posting misinformation, promoting terrible stuff like fascism, racism, sexism, etc. It does mean I mostly downvote anything positive about US conservatives, but that is because they tend to promote those things I mentioned already.

I sometimes also downvote people who go overboard with generally positive things by assuming anything other than agreeing with their narrow view is automatically malicious. Some of us are trying and admitting we aren't perfect or that maybe there is more than one way to be supportive than the one they think the only way.

I try to upvote most things I see, especially if someone took the time to comment under one of my posts.

If I downvote, it's usually because I see someone is actively being rude or is trying to steer something light into something controversial to bait arguments.

"Reddiquette" that included guidelines about upvoting and downvoting.

First time that I even hear about that LOL.

I do not follow any 'guidelines' when up/downvoting. It comes spontaneously.

I upvote any reply to anything I say and everything I reply to as a way of remembering where I've engaged. The only exceptions are things with clear perspective-lacking malice.

If it contributed to the conversation, I upvote. Especially if it's well-written and informative.

If it's off-topic, incorrect, or repetitive, I downvote.

If it's banal or uninteresting but not actually deleterious to discourse or distracting from the topic, I don't vote.

I upvote almost all replies to my comments, including those disagreeing with me, unless they clearly didn't take the time to read and understand my comment.

I vote on almost all comments I reply to, as well.

If I like it, I upvote. If I dislike it, I downvote. If I have no strong feelings, I do nothing. If I commented and it got a lot of upvotes, I return the favor and upvote the post and any decent comments.

downvotes are for condescension and things people already mentioned

I'm pretty liberal with the upvotes. I like to encourage people to participate and an upvote feels like saying "hey I see you and thanks for sharing." I regularly upvote things I don't like or don't agree with, if they are shared in good faith and contribute to the conversation.

Downvotes are for bigots and misinformation/disinformation/lies.

my instance has downvotes disabled - it allows me to move on with my life. Only upping just seems more zen

Downvotes are for off topic or inflammatory comments, not for things you disagree with, in my opinion.

For posts:

Interesting content gets updoot. Spam, misinformation, and conservative politics get the downdoot.

For comments:

Relevant to the discussion (be it top-level or deep in a thread), funny, and factual statements get updoots. Irrelevant comments, false information, poor argumentative skills, and conservative political get the downdoot.

Upvote if I find the post good and remember it exists, downvote disabled

My personal rules

Up = Like it, interesting novel take (even if I disagree), funny and clever

No vote with comment = disagree but worthwhile discussing, unintentional but incorrect and/or misleading info.

Down = Spam, low effort to the point it's insulting (clearly not reading beyond the title), flaming and flamebaiting (this is a big one on forums like this everywhere), trolling, intentionally incorrect or misleading information, off-topic/irrelevant stuff.

Report = hate speech, violence against members of our communities, incessant trolling or flaming or flamebaiting (more than twice in a row).

I was never a reddit member and so may miss some of that nuance, but I vote for things I enjoyed reading or for folks I enjoyed interacting with. I thought about down voting one thing, but then leaned that group didn't work that way. The whole point was to say something that was against the grain.

You guys have a downvote? Whoa, here on .one we do not.

Upvote: it is the same thing I was going to comment, or it is an extraordinarily good post that stands out from the masses

Downvote: it is objectively wrong or doesn't add to the discussion at all

Vast majority of everything, I neither upvote nor downvote.

Wow, I've used Reddit for years, and I have never ever seen such a guideline before! Now this is a really interesting post, and the comments are pretty insightful that make me think.

Yes, it totally makes sense not to upvote or downvote based on agreement or disagreement, but based on relevancy and accuracy. But what if the author is asking about our opinion, and someone has already commented my exact opinion? It feels natural to upvote it based on agreement.

Here's an example: there's a post asking about opinions, maybe advice, and then there are two comments. One that says "do drugs, kids, it's good", and one that says "no, don't do drugs, drugs are always bad". And I absolutely agree with one of those comments. If I upvote the one I agree with, and leave the other alone, maybe even downvote it, then the author of the post will see comments with weight. On the other hand, if I don't do anything, because "oh look, someone already commented my precise opinion, so I'm done here", then the author of the post might remain in doubt, because there will be two equally presented opinions and that's like no advice at all.

So all in all, it makes sense to have a system about what to upvote and what to downvote, but there are just things that feel wrong to upvote, even if the etiquette dictates that it should be upvoted.

Nevertheless, it would be a great idea to come up with a system (that can be applied in any situation) and stick to it.

Here's my take though:

What it felt like on Reddit by others:

Upvote: totally random

Downvote: totally random

What it feels like on Lemmy + what my impression of the voting system has been up until now:

Upvote: agree/useful/my girlfriend's post or comment

Downvote: strongly disagree/useless/spam/troll

From now on:

Well... this post definitely makes me think. I still have to make up my mind.

I'm afraid it's the same algorithm I use to answer the question whether I need a receipt.

"Glad i saw that" -> up-vote, "Wish i didn't see that" -> down-vote

I let lurkers do the upvoting or downvoting unless it's really good or really bad Downvotes don't federate from or to kbin anyway.

Up/downvotes are not intended as dis/agreement buttons. You are supposed to upvote relevant content and downvote irrelevant content, spam, trolls, hate, and misinformation/propoganda.

Upvoting on the basis of liking something played a large part in reddit's decline, where every sub was inundated with off-topic shit-posts of r/funny and r/adviceanimals circle-jerking. They were upvoted for a cheap laugh, but should've been downvoted for being off-topic.

The best example I had on reddit illustrating the importance of maintaining the integrity of community topics was this:

Do you think it's okay for r/wtf material of animals to be posted in r/awww or r/EyeBleach? If r/TheOnion posts were posted in r/WorldNews?

Comments on subs like r/TIL and even r/science became nothing but irrelevant jokes and memes, which buried relevant discussion. This voting behavior is why subs like r/nonononoyes lost their purpose and were spammed with shitty r/funny cross-posts.

I strictly upvote on the basis of relevant content. My wife has thought I'm crazy when I show her something we both are entertained by, and then she sees me promptly downvote it. Even if I enjoy something, I will downvote it if it's an off-topic post.

Conversely, I upvote dissenting opinions I don't agree with, even if I'm debating someone, if it is promoting topic discussion. When people downvote out of disagreement, it suppresses dissenting opinions and healthy discourse.

Downvoting due to disagreement is what leads to toxic echo-chamers. (Again, there's a clear difference in downvoting content promoting hate/racism/bigotry.)

Upvoting on the basis of cheap entertainment promotes off-topic and low-quality discussion/posting behavior.

I agree with it then I upvote. Usually don't downvote.

I generally don't downvote. I report a comment/post if they break rules. I block users that are stupid, mean, comment in bad faith, or are otherwise negative to my experience. I use an app that allows me to apply unique labels to users that only I can see if I am not quite ready to block them but want to be ready on next offense. I.e., someone who uses dog whistle language but I'm not sure it was intentional.

Most of the accounts I made for Lemmy are on instances that disable downvoting. That wasn't planned on my part, but I don't mind.

I don't vote very much because that's just too much responsibility for me to handle.