!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
I don't care about the rating on other people's content. On my own I only care so far as to use it as a guideline for whether I actually was interesting.
On reddit I was a trolling karma whore, but here? Here I'm much more about engaging with people and getting 3 upvotes tells me that I gave the community something meaningful.
There are only two things I think about when it comes to vote count:
if I make a joke, and it's not being replied to but being downvoted I want to know if people understood the joke, understood it even was a joke, or if the joke was just not funny.
If I see a question being asked that doesn't appear to be in bad faith being downvoted, and not answered, it pisses me off.
One thing I hope everyone takes from reddit, the troll's main weapon is downvoting in droves. I've seen 6 upvotes happen in under a minute on Lemmy and we don't have that kind of user base. Some posts don't even get federated that quickly. If the question was in good faith and downvoted, it was probably trolls. I hope you don't take that personal.
The amount of lurkers would surprise you.
All the lurkers upvoting this😂
When in comes to my own posts and comments, my trust in vague negative reactions is long gone.
Some things that made me more suspicious of Lemmy users:
For me, taking online feedback less seriously was a big part of growing up.
It depends, once I got like 20 upvotes and it was amazing to think them at 70% of Lemmy users read and agreed with my post!
Yes and no. The same comment on different communities can have vastly different results, so I think it's too easy to just "justify" why the ratios you don't agree with are there, while the ones you do are obviously "fair"
No, not at all. When you get a ton of downvotes but zero responses, assuming you didn’t just post literal nonsense, I consider it proof I’m correct and it’s just a truth people don’t like. When you’re wrong people will downvote you and tell you why, which should be a learning experience that a person should be humble enough to accept but just downvotes or responses only attacking you not you points is pure validation you’re speaking an uncomfortable truth
And when someone spins up 3 entire instances to create accounts to downvote you, you know you're right.
I check my downvotes every so often to see if I've made an ass of myself.
--Not safe for Grammar--
Thankfully, people often explain they're downvotes here, so I tend to learn something.
If I haven't internalized whatever it is, I'll find that their still downvoting me, so I get another chance to improve there opinion of me.
Edit: Good point. Warning added.
I downvoted because of the thing
Downvoting for "they're, there, their" gore, mark it NSFL next time sheesh
^/s^
.
But actually though
Good point. I've invented a new tag - Not Safe for Grammar.
I'm onto you're plan
Yes. Downvotes allow a well educated community to bury misinformation
I disagree, downvotes come free but replies are expensive, when downvotes are disabled you instead have replies that debunk you
You only encourage dogpiling when downvotes are available
i hate useless circlejerk nonsense getting updooted to the ceiling, and good but disagreeable information being downvoted into the earth.
Yes and I'm trying to stop it from happening.
It lets me feel like my time here is being useful if I get the upvotes. I try to limit myself to positive/fun/helpful posts or adding additional facts from other articles to someone's post of I feel more info is needed to get a full story, so if people reply or at least upvote, it feels like it was worth adding my contribution. If my humor/help isn't needed or wanted in a place, I don't want to both waste my time and annoy people.
Upvoted 🙂
Yay! Validation! 😁
Not really. Someone will disagree with me eventually, but that doesn't mean I'm interested in debating or earning their approval somehow.
They're helpful to determine the general community's take on something, even if there is little other engagement.
And if I'm being honest, getting upvotes is a sweet hit of dopamine. But I try to keep things in perspective.
I'm on an instance that only federates upvotes so I don't really think about downvotes or know if I am getting them.
I pretty much always win with votes. If I get upvotes, I think someone appreciated it. If someone downvotes, I think they’re a hater.
I won’t lie though; my adhd ass checks way too often in a desperate search for dopamine.
Usually no, unless I've left a reply disagreeing then someone else comes along and downvotes them, makes me look like an ass who downvotes anyone I disagree with. I also check my own comments to see if people agree with me but I'll keep the comment up either way, if I do change my mind I'd rather leave a new comment or add stuff in an edit.
It's not too difficult to bot votes on lemmy so they're even more pointless than they are on reddit.
When I see someone downvoted for no good reason, I tend to support them; upvotes don't sway me at all. My own stuff I see votes as a guide to how well I fit a community (except in one controversial group which attracts down votes – there voters are meaningless
I only care when I'm making a post, to help judge how people liked it. I don't pay attention to points inside threads really.
Yes, but actually no. Upvotes are are similar to seeing someone's smile or nodding in agreement. Downvotes are like a dead stare or shaking their head in disagreement.
If someone else is downvoted but seems to have posted in good faith or as a joke it means there is probably something I am missing. Maybe they are serious when I think it is a joke, or there is some context that is news to me.
If I have a commwnt that is downvoted significantly (like ten or more down than up, or only down) then I double check to see if I was unclear or maybe a joke didn't land. Mostly to make sure my intent came though.
If I clarify something and people just don't agree with it because they don't see the same nuance then I do think about it a but and come back later to see if maybe I was wrong or everyone else is a dumbass. Most of the time it is me not being clear enough. If they are dumbasses, oh well.
I also feel happy when a good comment gets upvoted to double digits. That is a nice feeling.
I like to say it doesn't change my view, but it probably does more than I realize. Everyone likes to think they're immune to stuff like that, but we really aren't.
wow, first time i see gif as profile pic :D yeah i disabled like 2 days ago votes and now i have actually no idea what comment on this post can have down or up votes and truly it feels nice, I recommend it to everybody
The intention behind most downvotes is
I use my post/comment history (and saves) as a way to know what threads to go check in on later. And I get a kick out of seeing a lot of upvotes and dislike seeing anything in negative territory. But I don't have votes in mind when I post.
Down votes are useful for estimating the exactly how badly damaged the sense of humour in the community is.
Yes, sometimes I say some stupid shit and other people correct me. Sometimes it's the reverse. We all keep each other accountable.
I also like that, but I'm not as fond of when the correction is immediately aggressive, dismissive or insulting.
Like when people start ascribing attributes to my personality without knowing me or make assumptions about why I said it. I'd rather have people asking me to elaborate than jumping to conclusions.
Yes. I've learned that (it helps when I) resond with "I" statements, for that kind of interaction.
"I don't see it that way." works as well as "You are wrong.", but the "I" version implies fewer assumptions about what the other person is trying to communicate.
Edit: I have had good luck with adjusting my approach, this way. (To add a quick I statement, haha.)
I prefer to see both numbers rather than the sum. The variance sort of gives a 'controversial' score. Can't get that with PieFed yet, but I prefer the deduplication of PieFed over the split scores on Voyager.
I dont think it changes my pov, but it def does for other people on a large scale
you could say the same message in different parts of the same thread, and by chance one will accumulate more downvotes and one will accumulate more upvotes
for example: https://sh.itjust.works/post/39444493/18993947 and https://sh.itjust.works/post/39444493/18993522 say the same thing, but one has 42 updates and 8 downvotes and one has 120 downvotes to 23 upvotes
people need to stop looking at these numbers
To me, it's a way to quantify how other people feel about my own positions. It's neither good nor bad to be upvoted or downvoted. People have unpopular takes sometimes and you shouldn't stake your identity on the amount of upvotes or downvotes you have.
Instead, upvotes and downvotes are most useful for other people to guage comments. Generally speaking, if a comment is universally downvoted, that likely means the position is unpopular enough that it adds no value to a discussion, and is therefore not worth engaging with.
I consider it to be a system built upon mutual understanding - that you don't have to seriously engage with everyone's viewpoints, and conversely, that nobody has to seriously engage with yours.
It becomes a problem when upvotes and downvotes are gamified like on Reddit, because Goodhart's Law demands that it stops serving its purpose when people are only attempting to optimize their upvote/downvote ratio.
I pay almost no attention to the scores on other people's posts, but admittedly, I do sometimes feel disheartened when I see what I consider an extremist view getting heavily upvoted. As for downvotes, I have those hidden, so in that sense, they’re a non-factor for me. But you're asking whether I care. Of course I care and anyone claiming otherwise is lying. We're social animals - we care what others think of us. That’s why I hid the downvotes in the first place: so they wouldn’t affect me. Mean comments are enough to deal with; I don’t need to hear the audience booing too.
My perhaps unpopular opinion is that while the voting system itself should remain, the scores should be hidden for everyone - and I mean both upvotes and downvotes. Downvotes don’t mean you’re wrong, and upvotes don’t mean you’re right. They’re just indicators of how popular your opinion is with the audience. That dynamic encourages people to self-censor unpopular views and, conversely, to post meaningless one-liners just for the applause.
Usually, no. Not for myself or others. Too many people vote emotionally for them to be useful feedback in most situations.
They also aren't useful in short time frames on lemmy. I've lost track of how many people get whiny about votes, but they just didn't wait for things to balance out. It's lemmy, shit takes hours to spread and get seen, especially since not everyone sorts by new. Chill the fuck out.
But sometimes, they can be a warning sign, or an indicator of a successful comment/post. And other times, they can help realize you posted or commented in the wrong place.
Only when I'm checking to see what I said before someone replied. Otherwise, I never check.