100 CCP is yet again a requirement to downvote and changes I pushed yesterday are now reverted. I spent about 6 hours yesterday reading your comments on my announcement and I think it's pretty clear that majority of you had concerns with removing restrictions. Back to the drawing board I guess. Please accept my apologies for causing the mess.
view the rest of the comments →
aikidoka ago
lol, 5 months on the site; I currently sit at 15CCP, and cannot downvote the truly shitty useless posts... I occasionally post a comment, but just not an everyday thing.
I think some form of balance could be found. I like that you're working on the issues that do exist for those of us who aren't in the standard voat use case. But I do agree with the general sentiment that a downvote ≠ disagree.
rdnetto ago
Counter-anecdote: I've only been a member for a month, and I've got 90 CCP. I don't think I've even been that active - probably posted 5-10 comments once every 3 days. It may help I tend to post in the Linux subs (which have less traffic, and are therefore easier to post something original in).
I think the threshold could be lowered to 50 CCP, but I don't have any problems with the underlying idea, which is that downvoting is restricted to people who actively participate in the community.
I_EAT_THOUGHTS ago
Similarly I have been active for less than a month and I am almost at 100. I think the requirement is a good security measure for preventing the manipulation of discourse, though it may not be enough on its own.
Hand-Banana ago
I fully expect to NEVER be able to downvote.... Even if you get 100ccp it goes down. You either have to be super popular, super active or just create a ton of accounts and upvote yourself. At least fewer people can go through your history and sage your posts.
dante2025 ago
If you don't participate in the community then you shouldn't be able to downvoat opinions you find "shitty." If you lurk, then lurk. If you want to be able to participate then contribute to the discussion. I've been here about a month and have well over 200 CCP. It's not hard to do.
aikidoka ago
wow, ok. I am busy with my life instead of the being in front of my laptop 24/7. And I was talking about posts or links to content not comments.
I like user sourced sites to read interesting content, and not everything that's posted is quality.
For example, when a heavily biased article (either direction) makes its way on to /v/politics and adds nothing to the conversation; I consider that a shitty post; There was one exactly like that yesterday, the only thing I have been able to down vote, and it wasn't an OpEd either. I like my "reporting" to be, what journalism used to be, well written and presented with both sides of the story as available at the time of publishing. Think about the crazy OpEd things that happened in the news surrounding that CEOs dismissal... not good reporting and not ethical at all. We should be making informed decisions based on neutral information, not the crazy MSNBC/FOX group think we get now that influences ideas and thoughts. Look to the SJWs and the crazy "liberty"/tea party folks for extreme examples of that byproduct.
/steps off soapbox
cfl1 ago
Comment downvotes and post downvotes are quite different.
9ac504b832 ago
But our upvotes are good enough? I'll be honest, I kind of resent you saying people like us don't participate, when I've been nothing but supportive of people. We're not lurking, we're just keeping our dumb opinions to ourselves (mostly).
gattaca ago
The 100 point downvoat thing is what discouages me from participating on voat, no one likes to be told they are not leet enough to participate snd this includes downvoating obvious spam. You want my content and participation, don't insult me by forcing me into the kiddy pool.
I_EAT_THOUGHTS ago
Down voats aren't "participation" - commenting and contributing are. Down voats exist only to identify posts that don't contribute to the discussion at hand. Maybe the poster didn't read the article, maybe they didn't understand the comment they are replying to and are being negative. Regardless, if being able to tag those posts is more important to you than being able to discuss things with others, it's probably a good thing that you'll never be able to do it.
NinjaPoolboy ago
Ya me too. If upvoats are for Agreements downvoats MUST be for Disagreements or else the system is really fucked up. Which it is. I personally think this "no downvoating disagreements" thing was part of the SJW strategy that killed reddit.
Kal ago
Reddiquette was dead long before the SJW movement, and I don't think they had anything to do with it. It isn't surprising it's a new concept to a lot of you.
fluffingtonthefifth ago
Upvoating is not for agreement, it's for interesting content or a well-argued comment.
laikaislost ago
That's what it is supposed to be, but in practice it turns into an agree/disagree button. Look at any civil indepth discussion where people disagree. The popular opinion gets upvoated and the minority opinion gets downvoated. And currently, only those who post a lot get the power to downvoat, which reinforces the majority/minority opinion.
calyxa ago
"Obvious spam" should be REPORTED not downvoated.
justcool393 ago
I'll be honest, I've never gotten the report button to work correctly. It just sits there on "reporting..." or whatever it says instead of completing correctly.
whisky_cat ago
Wait, you're being forced? Please explain.
PuttItOut ago
Promote this guy for offering his opinion.