4 ms·

I enjoy answering questions but like the poster, I kind of hold my breath any time I do. Toxic downvoting is not just a question thing. There are people who wi

I enjoy answering questions but like the poster, I kind of hold my breath any time I do. Toxic downvoting is not just a question thing. There are people who will downvote any and every answer even a correct one to a question they feel is unworthy of an answer.

hnthrowaway0315 4y ago
I think a big problem is voters are not shown and verified. If you upvote or downvote a post your id should show and you must provide a reason why the vote.
- mgkimsal 4y ago
  It might likely need to be an additional thing and phased in. Current voting can carry on as is, but 'verified voting' would be a secondary mechanism, and... over time people could choose to ignore the non-verified votes, or the non-verified votes could be phased out altogether. I like the simple up/down vote mechanism, but it definitely seems to be abused, and I would prefer more weight be given to votes with a public reason. Votes without an explanation should end up weighting less.
- berkle4455 4y ago
  can you imagine if HN had the gumption to offer the same? would solve so many issues.
- mdmglr 4y ago
  Perhaps downvotes should not be allowed at all.
  - arp242 4y ago
    How would you distinguish between "poor quality" and "just hasn't been viewed by many"?
    - mdmglr 4y ago
      Well right now on all social networks downvotes are used to silence others and in no way is indicative of quality. HN seems to due alright. Things people engage with "bubble up".
      - arp242 4y ago
        Stack Overflow isn't a social network. Whatever may or may not be the case on HN doesn't really have much bearing on Stack Overflow as they're radically different sites with a very different purpose.
matsemann 4y ago
If a 20k rep user answers a no-effort-clearly-duplicate-off-topic-question to get some more points, instead of using the moderation tools and pointing the asker in the correct direction, I gladly down vote.

hnthrowaway0315 4y ago

I think a big problem is voters are not shown and verified. If you upvote or downvote a post your id should show and you must provide a reason why the vote.

mgkimsal 4y ago
It might likely need to be an additional thing and phased in. Current voting can carry on as is, but 'verified voting' would be a secondary mechanism, and... over time people could choose to ignore the non-verified votes, or the non-verified votes could be phased out altogether. I like the simple up/down vote mechanism, but it definitely seems to be abused, and I would prefer more weight be given to votes with a public reason. Votes without an explanation should end up weighting less.
berkle4455 4y ago
can you imagine if HN had the gumption to offer the same? would solve so many issues.
mdmglr 4y ago
Perhaps downvotes should not be allowed at all.
- arp242 4y ago
  How would you distinguish between "poor quality" and "just hasn't been viewed by many"?
  - mdmglr 4y ago
    Well right now on all social networks downvotes are used to silence others and in no way is indicative of quality. HN seems to due alright. Things people engage with "bubble up".
    - arp242 4y ago
      Stack Overflow isn't a social network. Whatever may or may not be the case on HN doesn't really have much bearing on Stack Overflow as they're radically different sites with a very different purpose.

matsemann 4y ago

If a 20k rep user answers a no-effort-clearly-duplicate-off-topic-question to get some more points, instead of using the moderation tools and pointing the asker in the correct direction, I gladly down vote.