PieFed Meta

4105 readers

20 users here now

Discuss PieFed project direction, provide feedback, ask questions, suggest improvements, and engage in conversations related to the platform organization, policies, features, and community dynamics.

Wiki

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

rimu@piefed.social

How does PieFed improve voting compared to Reddit/Lemmy? (piefed.zip)

submitted 1 day ago by MindfulMaverick@piefed.zip to c/piefed_meta@piefed.social

27 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I’m trying to understand how PieFed’s voting culture is different. I’ll admit, I usually upvote things I like and downvote the rest. Sometimes, if a post has a low score, I don't even read the title, I just downvote and move on. I suspect I’m not the only one who does this.

I know PieFed shows "Attitude" (the percentage of positive vs. negative votes you cast) on profiles, which is a nice touch. But aside from that metric, it doesn't seem to physically limit the act of downvoting.

Are there plans to make voting more meaningful? For instance, I've seen suggestions in the community about restricting votes to subscribers to prevent "drive-by" downvotes from people who aren't part of the community. How does PieFed plan to handle the issue of users reflexively downvoting without engaging with the content?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] purplerabbit@piefed.blahaj.zone 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

A lot of that depends on the instance you're on. The one I'm on, for example, disabled downvoting, so you can only upvote. And to me, this has become an essential feature, and I refuse to go on an instance that allows downvoting.

Downvoting allows for passive aggressiveness and the shutdown of anything people don't want to see, which usually results in content about minorities being instantly buried without saying a word. Downvoting prevents meaningful engagement from happening.

On these kinds of instances, if something is wrong with a post or whatever, people will comment on it. Talk about it. And the culture of the community will do the rest. But if there is something you don't like, you have to face it, and you have to actually engage with it and express why you don't like it. You can't just throw your downvote and move on without expressing any form of criticism.

I genuinely think it's the best solution. I don't think you can re-fix the downvote button. Just get rid of it. :)

[–] Grail@multiverse.soulism.net 4 points 1 day ago

As a queer and nd entity, sometimes I see a post that's iffy, but I don't want to explain the issue to normies, so I just downvote. If downvotes are disabled, I have to comment and explain the microaggression, and expose Myself to hate if the mods don't want to remove it. In My experience spaces like that develop a culture that privileges mainstream voices for the specific subculture, but actually suppresses other minorities. For example, you could have a trans community that's very white dominated and features casual racism. Or an autism community where people use slurs that disparage people with ID or NPD.

[–] Bazell@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Well, removing the downwoting option does not remove the option to just send thumb down emoji as a reply. Yes, this removes anonymity, but still it will be hard for someone to discuss a single emoji like 👎 or ⬇️ since anyone can express their likes or dislikes.