4 ms·
... immediately.
by lotsoflumens 10y ago
... immediately.
- scrollaway 10y agoA user-driven upvote/downvote system is a form of decentralized moderation. Do you also believe that if a post is being downvoted, it's censorship? Do you believe that upvotes are a tool of censorship? They can be, of course. Censorship is not just deletions/removal. You can censor something by hiding it, drowning it out, discrediting the author, etc. Now keep all that in mind before giving a one-word response to a very complex question.
- esbranson 10y agoThe article uses moderation in a sense apart from an upvote/downvote system. Your argument is premised on a upvote/downvote system being moderation. How exactly does it moderate? If it merely reorders and doesn't remove, then this is not moderation in the context at hand. Therefore your argument is invalid. (Your argument is really just orthogonal, premised on different assumptions.)
- scrollaway 10y agoThe point I was trying to make was that you can't just say "immediately" and get away with it. And upvotes/downvote don't necessarily have to merely reorder. On many websites, large counts of downvote automatically hide and sometimes delete the post in question.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- lotsoflumens 10y agoSorry about the delay in responding ... I don't consider upvotes/downvotes by themselves to be moderation or censorship. That's just non-verbal communication. However, when an upvote or downvote system hides a post or promotes a post, then it's censorship, because promoting a post necessarily hides some other post.