4 ms·

I prefer upvotes/downvotes to likes, but there's an issue with "I downvote because I disagree" instead of "I downvote because the content is of poor quality".

I prefer upvotes/downvotes to likes, but there's an issue with "I downvote because I disagree" instead of "I downvote because the content is of poor quality". I also 100% agree that groupthink can be an issue, it's almost like the highlighted notes on kindle--I feel like once they reach a critical mass, people start highlighting the same text without really thinking about it. So, the ideal, for me is to allow for up/downvotes but not display them on the screen (like in certain Mastodon setups).

ookdatnog 5y ago
Upvote/downvote have a design flaw. They are intended to be asymmetrical (one for "I like this or agree with this or find it interesting", the other is _intended_ for "irrelevant, doesn't contribute" and not "don't like this/disagree"), but their design is symmetrical. They are equally prominent in the UI, they have mirrored names, etc. So no wonder people use downvotes as the mirror concept of upvotes.
- geraltofrivia 5y ago
  I always think that these interactions should be modeled as: upvotes as ‘I want others to read this’, and downvote as ‘I don’t want others to read this’. I believe your intended behaviours (I like this or agree with this or find it interesting/irrelevant, doesn't contribute" and not "don't like this/disagree) also fit the aforementioned model.
  - kortex 5y ago
    That gives me the interesting idea of a twitter UX where the buttons are volume-greater and volume-less (just like sound control). With or without limits. It's pretty much what people are trying to accomplish already; this just makes it explicit. Would be neat to see how people react to hitting "max volume". You could model it in all sorts of ways. Do you silently accumulate, or do you keep hysteresis, such that you need a constant stream of positive engagement to keep it up?
remram 5y ago
What about explicit options? Instead of a single downvote, have multiple options like "not relevant", "factually incorrect", "disrespectful", ... This might 1) guide users towards not using those buttons for "disagree" (they are explicitly something else) 2) get richer signals for both evaluating content/accounts and the quality of reviews from specific voters
- rpastuszak 5y ago
  You need to strike the balance between effort and usefulness. There's no cost attached to us hitting like/dislike, but having more options would result in decision fatigue. That's less mindless scrolling and clicking on sh*t. Don't get me wrong, I do agree that it would be nice to have something more meaningful/useful there, but too many options will reduce engagement, and that's a no no for a social network relying on advertising revenue. (I think that ads should not exist as they're unethical and harmful)
  - remram 5y ago
    But it's not like you need to downvote. If you can't be bothered to figure out why you're downvoting, maybe you just shouldn't.

ookdatnog 5y ago

Upvote/downvote have a design flaw. They are intended to be asymmetrical (one for "I like this or agree with this or find it interesting", the other is _intended_ for "irrelevant, doesn't contribute" and not "don't like this/disagree"), but their design is symmetrical. They are equally prominent in the UI, they have mirrored names, etc. So no wonder people use downvotes as the mirror concept of upvotes.

geraltofrivia 5y ago
I always think that these interactions should be modeled as: upvotes as ‘I want others to read this’, and downvote as ‘I don’t want others to read this’. I believe your intended behaviours (I like this or agree with this or find it interesting/irrelevant, doesn't contribute" and not "don't like this/disagree) also fit the aforementioned model.
- kortex 5y ago
  That gives me the interesting idea of a twitter UX where the buttons are volume-greater and volume-less (just like sound control). With or without limits. It's pretty much what people are trying to accomplish already; this just makes it explicit. Would be neat to see how people react to hitting "max volume". You could model it in all sorts of ways. Do you silently accumulate, or do you keep hysteresis, such that you need a constant stream of positive engagement to keep it up?

remram 5y ago

What about explicit options? Instead of a single downvote, have multiple options like "not relevant", "factually incorrect", "disrespectful", ... This might 1) guide users towards not using those buttons for "disagree" (they are explicitly something else) 2) get richer signals for both evaluating content/accounts and the quality of reviews from specific voters

rpastuszak 5y ago
You need to strike the balance between effort and usefulness. There's no cost attached to us hitting like/dislike, but having more options would result in decision fatigue. That's less mindless scrolling and clicking on sh*t. Don't get me wrong, I do agree that it would be nice to have something more meaningful/useful there, but too many options will reduce engagement, and that's a no no for a social network relying on advertising revenue. (I think that ads should not exist as they're unethical and harmful)
- remram 5y ago
  But it's not like you need to downvote. If you can't be bothered to figure out why you're downvoting, maybe you just shouldn't.