https://www.reddit.com/r/TheoryOfReddit/comments/1gs5dk6/why_not_have_a_downvoting_tax/
created by EmynMuilTrailGuide on 15/11/2024 at 20:06 UTC
17 upvotes, 17 top-level comments (showing 17)
That is, payable with karma and/or require a comment.
I've become a serial upvoter. If I see a post that's not obvious trash with a vote count of 0, especially if it does not yet have any comments, I upvote it. Why? Because some human being put themselves out there and should be able to do so without some angry douche with no life taking it out on them randomly. Post karma is about trending and it's not a Facebook Like button. If you don't want something to trend, then at least do the courtesy of saying why.
With all that ... yeah, I'm a hopeless optimist. I do realize that this idea would likely turn into a-holes not only downvoting, but posting some randomized or hateful comment, if not an actual diatribe revealing how thoroughly they've devolved into douchebags. But, at least they'd be seen for what they are.
Comment by akaBigWurm at 15/11/2024 at 20:20 UTC
26 upvotes, 4 direct replies
OP would you rather get downvoted or flamed?
Comment by [deleted] at 15/11/2024 at 20:43 UTC
11 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Because that would be a bandaid to the overarching issue of people using the system incorrectly. I wouldn't support it because in the proposed system, you are punishing people using it correctly because other people downvote opinions they disagree with.
The problem is and has always been two ideological differences people who want to bury stuff they dont like vs. people who downvote stuff that doesn't contribute to the discussion.
Comment by 17291 at 15/11/2024 at 21:52 UTC
6 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Requiring a comment to downvote would encourage trolling. Plenty of people get off on negative attention, so this would give them exactly what they want.
Comment by boulevardofdef at 15/11/2024 at 20:18 UTC
18 upvotes, 1 direct replies
I'm with you. I do the same thing with downvoted comments. I call it "altruistic upvoting." I'll even upvote comments I personally disagree with if they're made in good faith.
I actually think the most reliable indicator that your hot take is correct is when it gets heavily downvoted but nobody comments.
Comment by [deleted] at 15/11/2024 at 20:15 UTC
6 upvotes, 1 direct replies
[deleted]
Comment by Epistaxis at 15/11/2024 at 23:41 UTC*
3 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Every time someone has an idea about downvotes, you have to consider whether there should be some equal and opposite solution for upvotes as well, or if not you have to have a reason why they're not symmetric. Maybe someone downvotes a post that isn't "obvious trash" simply because they disagree with it, and that's bad. So if someone upvotes a post that is obvious trash because they agree with it, that's the same cause and the same effect.
Under your system, should upvotes also have a tax, or should we be paid an incentive to upvote? It seems like "if you *do* want something to trend, then at least do the courtesy of saying why" could make just as much sense; a lot of things trend that shouldn't. If your downvote tribunal would expose "angry douches" and "a-holes" then an upvote tribunal might expose mindless conformists and circlejerkers.
Comment by charlieshammer at 15/11/2024 at 20:17 UTC
3 upvotes, 1 direct replies
I admire your Optimism. I’m gunna upvote you. Because you’re at 0 but you put yourself out there.
Comment by ixfd64 at 15/11/2024 at 21:54 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
As a note, Stack Exchange has such a feature. Downvoting someone's post also deducts your reputation score.
Comment by 9peppe at 15/11/2024 at 23:17 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Maybe users you downvote should be hidden from you, so you either get a better experience by hiding users that don't contribute to the discussion, or you end up shadowbanning yourself if you abuse downvotes.
Comment by Alarmed-Bag7330 at 22/11/2024 at 03:13 UTC
1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
It would be useful if Reddit would train users a bit better that the downvote button does not equal "disagree with this opinion" but rather is supposed to mean "this is low quality content". Upvote doesn't mean "agree with this opinion", it should mean "this is a quality contribution.
Right now diverse opinions are silenced as the brigade of downvotes come in if someone takes a point that is against mainstream reddit hive mind, even if that contribution is well written and factually correct.
I'm guilty of deleting comments when I come back a minute later and I'm -100 just because I said something that was not the majority opinion. I don't care about karma or whatever of course (i mean who cares) but I also don't want my profile to look like I'm someone who posts junk / lies / insults.
Comment by [deleted] at 24/11/2024 at 20:21 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Worst kind of redditor.
Comment by Alternative-Farmer98 at 25/11/2024 at 06:44 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
I appreciate out of the box thinking but if you're going to punish people for excessive down voting what about upvoting?
And sometimes it's downvotes are because people are being racist or Nazis or hateful or spreading misinformation or violating rules.
Sometimes up votes are upvoting those very same things.
I do understand there could be a logic to sort of trying to prevent an excess of cynicism or negativity or whatever but ready to such a huge place that the amount of bots that probably upload and download stuff is dramatically more than any single human.
So it's hard to imagine if you could use an algorithm to actually gauge like the honesty within sincerity or the excessiveness with which someone is uploading and down voting
But it's not the whole point of Reddit? Beyond the conversations and reading The other thing you do is give your input.
Comment by waydownindeep13_ at 06/12/2024 at 02:24 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
It would be too difficult to build a system that would not be gamed. Let's say that a negative rating costs two of your points. You see people post opinions that you disagree with or facts that you dislike, so you mash the dislike button and run out of points. how do you get more? There would have to be a way. Maybe people can give positive points for free. Well, then people will post in give me points threads to get free points so they can continue negative rating forever.
Okay, maybe people need to buy points. Well, then we have a problem of reduced engagement because no one wants to spend to neg rate except lunatics.
What if we had free daily points? This leads to the same problem as the free points. At some point, the cost of negative rates is insignificant because the accumulated points are so high.
The best solution might be to publicize voting records. Either show who is negative voting specific posts or make the number of negative vote a person has given public. Even that would only work if people have shame, which redditors lack.
Comment by waydownindeep13_ at 06/12/2024 at 02:24 UTC
1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
It would be too difficult to build a system that would not be gamed. Let's say that a negative rating costs two of your points. You see people post opinions that you disagree with or facts that you dislike, so you mash the dislike button and run out of points. how do you get more? There would have to be a way. Maybe people can give positive points for free. Well, then people will post in give me points threads to get free points so they can continue negative rating forever.
Okay, maybe people need to buy points. Well, then we have a problem of reduced engagement because no one wants to spend to neg rate except lunatics.
What if we had free daily points? This leads to the same problem as the free points. At some point, the cost of negative rates is insignificant because the accumulated points are so high.
The best solution might be to publicize voting records. Either show who is negative voting specific posts or make the number of negative vote a person has given public. Even that would only work if people have shame, which redditors lack.
Comment by sega31098 at 23/12/2024 at 03:17 UTC*
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
I find the upvoting/downvoting feature is already very fickle to begin with. Many users including myself already report that their downvotes typically don't ever register even while other users can downvote them, and likewise there's also been quite a few posts that report that their upvotes never register but their downvotes always do. The mechanism of this also seems to be distinct from the vote fuzzing feature that Reddit has (there's been lots of posts about this over the years on subs like r/help). My sense is that Reddit has some opaque anti vote manipulation system that basically restricts users' voting privileges based on some criteria, but also the unintended consequences of blocking genuine votes while being powerless to stop many cases of vote manipulation.
Comment by Dunkmaxxing at 02/01/2025 at 15:04 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
I back it. Would probably out a lot of bots or downvote train hoppers. I almost never downvote unless something is genuinely insane that I'm reading and in that case I basically always comment anyway.
Comment by successful_nothing at 16/11/2024 at 03:05 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
this is a brilliant idea. turning karma into an actual pointless currency makes sense because that's basically how people view it anyway.