4 ms·
I agree with you that avoiding downvotes doesn't promote healthy discussion. However, I take exception to someone pre-empting downvotes - to me personally, it c
by blowski 11y ago
I agree with you that avoiding downvotes doesn't promote healthy discussion. However, I take exception to someone pre-empting downvotes - to me personally, it comes across as a challenge to disagree and I don't think that's helpful to a healthy discussion either.
If someone writes something without thinking about whether they'll be upvoted or downvoted, then that's great, even if I disagree with them. But writing with the explicit assumption that you'll be downvoted suggests that you're being contrarian.
- Infinitesimus 11y agoI understand much better now with your clarification, thanks
- noxToken 11y agoFact of the matter is that websites like this breed hivemind behavior. The behavior may only be on a per thread basis, but when people see a lot of upvotes and positive praise, the natural response to a challenging post seems to be, "You're just going against the grain. Stop being an asshole." This is also true for comments that get downvoted. As an example, I had a post where I said the concept of payday loans is not a bad one while simultaneously denouncing the predatory practices that payday loan companies employ. You borrow a small money for 15 days, pay back the loan plus 20% ($200 + 20% in fees and interest = $240), and call it a day. All it took was one post to say that I'm siding with the payday loan companies. The highest I saw was +3. It's currently sitting at -7. I think prefacing the post would have helped the vote count. Prefacing a post acknowledging possible downvotes is a forewarning to readers that the poster is going against the grain - contrarian if you will - but not in way that's purely devil's advocate. It says to me, "I know what I'm about to say disagrees with you guys, but please hear me out." It's probably not the most eloquent way to express that idea. I have never seen it as a challenge though.