Because to me, they seem like de facto "Agree and “Disagree” buttons, whether or not it was the intent.
My upvotes are for posts I like, downvotes I don’t really use except when the content is factually wrong or misleading
I’ll use downvote if the person is overtly racist, homophobic or just mean. Name calling or being just unpleasant. It’s ok to not agree. It’s not ok to dehumanize someone for a different perspective.
The “I like this” and the “I’m a dipshit” buttons.
Even if I’d technically agree with the downvote, if you do it I lose respect for you. No one deserves that instant fast food validation that they’re better than someone. You’re not.
Edit: this is an interesting post to downvote. You’re just agreeing with me.
I lose respect for you.
Nobody cares
You absolutely do.
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.
deleted by creator
For posts, upvote means I want more of this, that’s some good content. Downvote means I want less of this, that’s some bad content.
For comments, upvote means good point, good joke, excellent addition to the conversation. Downvote means bad point, bad joke, poor addition to the conversation.
Now I admit I have a hard time upvoting a comment that adds a good point to the discussion, but I personally disagree with.
I do wish we had a way to separate good/bad content from agree/disagree. I know Reddit defaulted to hiding downvoted content, a default that I found reasonable. However using Lemmy, that wasn’t the default, and I’ve grown to prefer seeing all content. Don’t get me wrong, I see some garbage, and I see stuff I disagree with, but I think it’s useful.
I still like the old slashdot method where there were categories you could give to a comment. Was this insightful, or was it funny. I think the method has merits but I am not sure how well it scales as it is more complicated and requires the people moderating to give serious thought to WHY a comment is good or bad.
Practically yes, despite the way that they ought to be used.
It’s such a shame. Lemmy should be a place where we can collectively share ideas and debate openly. Comments and posts should only ever be downvoted if they’re off topic, hateful or misleading. However, in reality people get downvoted mostly because someone simply doesn’t like or wholly agree with them.
It’s still better here than reddits awful circlejerks and echo chambers, but not by much and we should be wary of devolving to a state where people are disincentivized to post because they have an idea or opinion that may only be slightly off kilter to the hive mind.
Just to let you know, you posted your reply 3 times. I downvoted the other 2 (consider deleting them).
Yes I noticed, sorry, bad internet connection, I have deleted them now.
It’s the “I like/don’t like the sound of that button”
Nobody’s going to upvote shit takes, obviously.
If someone’s being an asshole or an idiot, I’m going to downvote them.
If someone says something that needs saying, or that’s interesting or funny, I’m going to upvote it.
deleted by creator
There are no up or down vote police. You use them as you like.
LEMMY POLICE, OPEN UP!
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.
An upvote should be for quality content/discussion. This might be a well researched comment, a good joke, or just something that leads the discussion in a meaningful or interesting way. Generally, things I think should be valued or shared. There will obviously be bias, but my opinion isn’t the basis of my decision. I try to upvote good-faith or thorough arguments I disagree with.
Downvotes are for low-quality and unhelpful content that I think shouldn’t be spread. This doesn’t have to be irrelevant or against the community rules, but often is. Things I might downvote include overused reposts, unnecessarily rude or insulting comments, low quality comments (IE someone trying to argue a well cited comment with an anecdote and nothing else), or spam.
They should be “this is worthy to be seen by many” and “this is not”. Sometimes that also overlaps with my agreement with the post.
This is how I use the vote arrows too.
I think I’ve gotten a little idealistic since moving to lemmy because I definitely used the votes as agree/disagree on Reddit, because it was clear that was what the hivemind decided it was for, who was I to argue.
It was literally in the reddiquette that you’re not supposed to use them like that, but in practice, you’re absolutely right and that’s how they’re used.
In the olden days there was ‘reddiquette’ which still existed on smaller, non default subs. You’d downvote poor contributions and up vote good ones
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 (approval, agreement, joy, etc.) and downvotes always relating negative emotion (disagreement, disapproval, anger, etc.)?
That is, are upvotes “yays” and downvotes “boos”?
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
hm, I do think what I meant by “yay” is some kind of supportive or positive emotional response, which is still happening when you are upvoting terrible news for being informative, i.e. what you are responding to with “yay” is being informed and wishing others to be informed, not the content of the news itself.
(For context I’m drawing on the metaethical theory of emotivism here as a framework.)
I wouldn’t “agree” with a joke
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.
