Because to me, they seem like de facto "Agree and “Disagree” buttons, whether or not it was the intent.
I generally upvote when I see a comment that makes a good point I think is underrated. You could argue that this is a kind of agreement. But, in my view, agreement alone is not the only criteria. Stating obvious truths isn’t really worth anyone’s time, even if they are agreeable. I will also upvote posts that changed my mind or are close to doing so, or impress me (insightful, or funny).
I down vote spam and posts that misrepresent a position or argument (straw man).
I will not vote at all for most posts.
It’s the “I like/don’t like the sound of that button”
It’s supposed to be about relevance and moderation of abusive content, not agreement, but that’s not usually the case.
Sometimes. I think the meaning of the arrows are somewhat contextual.
Downvoting spam for example isn’t “disagreement”, but it is a kind of disapproval.
Upvoting your post isn’t “agreement”, but I do it because I think it’s an interesting question (maybe a kind of approval)?
If we generalized I guess we could ask whether upvotes are always relating positive emotion and downvotes always relating negative emotion?
That is, are upvotes “yays” and downvotes “boos”?
I still upvote posts in news communities informing me of terrible things, so upvote isn’t necessarily a yay. Downvote might be boo, though
I wouldn’t “agree” with a joke
That’s how I treat them. Maybe with a bit more nuance: I’ll upvote for something funny, informative things, or general good takes. I’ll downvote if someone has a bad take, is unnecessarily mean, or is generally incoherent.
If the comment doesn’t spark a reaction I just keep scrolling.
What you say and what you describe are not the same. Your explanation is literally how it was explained on the other site. So you are better than you think you are. =)
And I do it the same as you. Something I disagree with or don’t like but is reasonably argued and not mean or full of any -isms? No vote from me.
Often too I’ll upvote a highly downvoted comment because I don’t think it deserved to be downvoted as much as it was, even if it’s one I’d otherwise downvote. Unless it’s horrible, in which case I’ll pile the fuck on
It a comment was well thought out but I disagree, I comment or keep scrolling.
People are too lazy to do that, so they downvote.
If a story about someone getting hurt because X is posted, you don’t downvote it because you dislike what happened, you upvote it because it’s important information that should be shared.
If someone makes a civilized and measured argument that you don’t agree with, you don’t downvote it because you disagree with their stance, you upvote it because it’s worthwhile discussion and all viewpoints deserve to be heard.
If you’re unsure how to feel about something, you can just not vote on it and scroll on. Unfortunately, there are apps that hide things when you vote. Some people are trained to always vote as a way of clearing their feed.
And other social media has spent decades training people that up means like and down means dislike. So the distinction that places like Lemmy or Reddit have from places like YouTube or Facebook is always going to be hard to convey to the many, many people who have been taught to think otherwise.
this fairly informative response has downvotes, ironically.
downvoting something only because you disagree with its contents is a sign of immaturity. it screams, “i personally don’t like this viewpoint so i’ll do everything in my power to suppress it from everyone else.”.
the mature response would be to leave the voting buttons alone and provide instead a measured response of the reasons for your disagreement.
They shouldn’t be used as such, but frequently are. It is even more difficult to distinguish between disagreement and insufficient argumentation.
Shouldn’t be but they tend to be.
Sometimes people just straight up use them as agree/disagree buta lot of folks struggle to admit that an argument in favour of something with which they disagree can still be a worthwhile argument.
If they were, they’d be called Agree and Disagree buttons.
There are no up or down vote police. You use them as you like.
deleted by creator
No, that’s the [other place] mentality. Upvote if you want to increase visibility to the post. For example, there may be a post with a link to an article about some politician doing something I disagree with. I would still upvote it if the post allows me to discuss why I disagree with said action.
Downvote if the content is harmful to the community (for example spam, overt racism, etc).
This is precisely how I use up and down votes.
I would also, as an example upvote something I think was incorrect if the was an insightful reply to it I felt people should see.
To clarify, I’m not talking about a troll post with a clever “dunk” reply.
Trolls always get downvoted.
No, that’s the [other place] mentality.
Nah, it’s the same exact nonsense here too.
This is a question of prescriptivism vs. descriptivism. People might say they shouldn’t be used as such, but I’ll bet a lot of people who say that are guilty of doing it anyway.
"Agree and “Disagree” will just leave us in a Lemmy bubble.
They should be more about “good post or bad post”, so something that may be disagreeable gets upvotes if it is well stated.
Reward thought, creativity, etc, and let us all learn.
They should be more about “good post or bad post”, so something that may be disagreeable gets upvotes if it is well stated.
I don’t care how well stated some anti-vax or flat-earth bullshit is … It’ll get downvoted regardless because I disagree.
That would just be misinformation, something downvote was intended for.
That would just be misinformation
Sure, according to us. But you don’t actually need to be right to think you’re right. If someone believes the earth is flat, they’ll downvote “globe-talk” as misinformation, just as it was intended! So it all just comes back to (dis)agreeing.
Of course, but these examples are provably false. Flat earthers have accidentally disproved themselves many times.
If they are just having a giggle then whatever, but some are serious and that is damaging to the legitimacy of science, which is a dangerous path.
If the poster is open to discussion, perhaps some chat could make them reconsider their position. So I wouldnt necessarily downvote. Context is important, so I still wont just use it as a disagree button.
I know and I chose those two examples to illustrate that people will even disagree with stuff that is blatantly factual. So it just gets worse if you enter murkier territory, like politics or ethics where there is no firm factual basis.
I’m sure you won’t have to search too long for a very well written post by some tanky about how a North Korean style dictatorship is superior to western democracy. Should you upvote it just because it’s well written, even if you think the idology is insane and dangerous?
Agreed.
- Upvote: Adds to the community.
- Downvote: Doesn’t belong in this community.
That would be nice but, no, it’s the agree/disagree button just like Reddit. There is honestly very little difference between Lemmy and reddit. Mostly just the numbers.
When you upvote a funny comic, does that mean you agree with it? Do you agree with cute cat pics?
It is more than just agree/disagree.
It wasn’t meant to be an agree/disagree button on Reddit either.
It’s meant for upvoting posts that contribute to the topic/community and downvoting stuff that doesn’t, such as spam or trolling.
People get emotional over a comment and click the downvote as it makes them feel empowered, that’s how it always ends up. Maybe just having upvotes only would work better.
Yep. Didn’t work out that way though just like it didn’t work out that way here
Disagree
Downvoted
Agree. Upvoted.
They do sometimes end up used as agree/disagree buttons, but they’re intended to be more about whether it’s good content that provides some value, and downvotes are when you don’t provide any value. This leave room for disagreement without downvoting a well written post that does add to the discussion.
I use downvotes for spam, and posts/comments what are just plainly wrong, incorrect, misleading or dangerous. Stuff I think is good gets upvoted, and stuff I disagree with but there’s otherwise nothing wrong with it, I don’t vote.
I upvote content that may be useful or interesting to others, content I agree with and good jokes.
I try to only downvote spam, misinformation and any troll content.
Pretty much this. With maybe the addition of downvoting assholes. You can be right but there is no need to act like a smug prick about something.
This is far more succinct than I could have put it. Same.
