By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Website Topics - Article Downvotes should be removed - Yay or Nay?

 

Should down votes be removed?

YES!!! 22 27.16%
 
NO!!! 45 55.56%
 
Keep it but stop comments from being removed 14 17.28%
 
Total:81

Removing downvotes sounds good. Or leaving them but making them public, so we can see who is downvoting everything for console warz and mock them accordingly.



Around the Network

Fine with keeping downvotes as long as they're made public going forward.

No more hiding comments either.

Both will be improvements to the current implementation, the former will make users think more about what they're downvoting rather than just spamming it everywhere, I hope, it will also make it easy for the Mods to spot any abuse in the form of alts.



padib said:
Ryuu96 said:

Your voice is not worth x4 users Imo, it's not an accurate representation of VGChartz.

Not sure what old problem would return if we removed the supporter perk along with making likes and dislikes in articles no longer anonymous to curb abuse and make people think more about just slapping a dislike on something with no explanation.

Snip

You are focusing on the wrong problem. As I said, people who pay 70$ to a website are not in a position of abuse but of support. And the rare cases do not warrant this obsession. You are better off focusing on individuals like Runa who outright attack others than put your energy on a marginal issue.

If you actually focused on real problems we suffer on the site, this place will only get better, and we are on the right track, and the features you want to remove have helped to make it better despite the few cases of weirdness.

Anyhow I know I won't change your mind, I don't get a sense that you are here to discuss but rather to pressure the community to remove the features.

My point is not that there is no problem, or that the cost to change things are monumental, but there is time and effort spent to make them happen and to remove them is to throw that investment. Moreover, my point is that the benefits far outweigh the problems possible, and that the site has gotten much better in terms of quality posts, and the systems you are criticizing helped achieve this, and that there are mich more severe problems to take care of before this.

You need to concentrate on users who don't tolerate others and antagonize, not on debatable details such as perks that supporters get for caring about the site, and have no grounds to suspect the intentions of people who pay 70$ to you and other staff.

Wow.

Drunk right now so ill add a much better reply to this but who the hell you think you are?

Site has always been good. The articles a fucked, you know it i know it so what the hell is your problem. I guess you like eco chambers right?

We are not talking about the forum here but the "Articles". like i said ill have a much better reply for you tomorrow

Edit: never mind Ryuu gave you the perfect reply so i wont need to and you have some neck on you to attack one of the best mods we have on this site.

Last edited by zero129 - on 01 January 2022

padib said:
Ryuu96 said:

Your voice is not worth x4 users Imo, it's not an accurate representation of VGChartz.

Not sure what old problem would return if we removed the supporter perk along with making likes and dislikes in articles no longer anonymous to curb abuse and make people think more about just slapping a dislike on something with no explanation.

Snip

You are focusing on the wrong problem. As I said, people who pay 70$ to a website are not in a position of abuse but of support. And the rare cases do not warrant this obsession. You are better off focusing on individuals like Runa who outright attack others than put your energy on a marginal issue.

If you actually focused on real problems we suffer on the site, this place will only get better, and we are on the right track, and the features you want to remove have helped to make it better despite the few cases of weirdness.

Anyhow I know I won't change your mind, I don't get a sense that you are here to discuss but rather to pressure the community to remove the features.

My point is not that there is no problem, or that the cost to change things are monumental, but there is time and effort spent to make them happen and to remove them is to throw that investment. Moreover, my point is that the benefits far outweigh the problems possible, and that the site has gotten much better in terms of quality posts, and the systems you are criticizing helped achieve this, and that there are mich more severe problems to take care of before this.

You need to concentrate on users who don't tolerate others and antagonize, not on debatable details such as perks that supporters get for caring about the site, and have no grounds to suspect the intentions of people who pay 70$ to you and other staff.

We always welcome site related feedback, even if we have other site related issues that also need to be resolved.
The order of which are resolved first may not come down to how important they are, but what is currently possible to fix, and what is not at the moment.

This issue was raised by members, asking other members and staff for their input.
And it's not the first time we've heard unfavorable opinions from members about the current voting system.


I see you are mainly focusing on two claims regarding the voting system:

1 - That it is actually not a problem, and in fact has a positive effect on the site.
2 - Someone that pays should be trusted to be responsible.


For the former, I think that is a fair argument to make, but it would help if you could demonstrate why you think it has had more of a positive effect?


For the latter, this doesn't take the context of the perk system into account. You wouldn't be nervous if everyone that pays got access to coding, could merge/delete all threads, and ban whoever they want, etc? I'm sure that wouldn't end well.

I don't think there's a correlation between spending money on something, and using it responsibly.
Every day people donate money to streamers just to say something toxic, or buy a subscription to a service, only to leak it to others online for free, etc.

Nor do I think there's a correlation between someone wanting what's good for a community, and being the right fit for it.
Because people will have different views on what good means.


Though even if we assumed that no one is abusing the voting system, it's still worth considering if such a system is working as intended.
I think the purpose of a Like/Dislike ratio system is to be able to gauge how many people feel one way or another about something. But this system makes that impossible.

I think one potential solution would be if it was visible to everyone who likes or dislikes a comment, both in articles and on the forum.

padib said:

people who pay 70$ to you and other staff.

This has been said a few times in the thread already, but again for clarity, Ryuu does not receive any money. Moderator is not a paid position. Funding goes to the writing staff, sales team, and the development team.

Last edited by Hiku - on 02 January 2022

Let's just go back to Gen X culture. Add a "Fuck you" button.

I'll let you decide what it actually does.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Around the Network

I'd prefer keeping downvotes but tweaking the system since I don't like the idea of only having positive votes. For forum post likes I enjoy them and it does make me feel at least a bit more encouraged to post though it's possible the overall impact when taking into account everyone is negative.



If folk don't want the extra voting power to apply for upvotes only then I would suggest either dumping the extra voting power for Supporters entirely or doing a big tweak on it. One idea could be a slight tweak to Zero's idea of Supporters receiving a certain amount of extra votes per month but those extra votes are spread across both upvotes and downvotes, so you could end up using all your extra votes on upvotes for example.

And no, they can't add the whole amount onto one comment, it's one extra vote per comment, I would likely recommend being pretty stingy on it though, I would honestly do something like 2 extra votes for Bronze, 4 for Silver and 6 for Gold or maybe 5, 10 and 15 at a push as it's a whole month they are meant to last for, though I think even that is too much cause I simply don't believe someone should have extra voting power.

Or cap the extra voting power at x2 for all tiers cause x4 is pretty ridiculous Tbh. Of these two ideas I would prefer the extra votes per month as it's a total amount which goes down every time it's used on either a upvote or downvote, it will make it more meaningful and thought out on what they're used on, it's also slightly more fair to the average user than having x4 voting power or even x2 on every comment.

I don't like the idea of giving users any amount of extra voting power though as I've made clear multiple times, I'm just spit balling some other ideas that are a sorta middle-ground, I still think we dump the extra voting power entirely, unhide comments below a certain threshold and make likes/dislikes public.

The latter two can be done first and the Supporter perk can be tweaked later after discussion.

Last edited by Ryuu96 - on 03 January 2022

Norion said:

I'd prefer keeping downvotes but tweaking the system since I don't like the idea of only having positive votes. For forum post likes I enjoy them and it does make me feel at least a bit more encouraged to post though it's possible the overall impact when taking into account everyone is negative.

I didn't really consider that receiving an upvote on a forum comment could encourage more posting.

So it seems like

+ Upvotes could encourage more comments as it's nice to know your comments are appreciated
+ Upvotes stop the spam of "Agreed" posts - Although technically, this is against the rules anyway.
-  Upvotes could cause a decline in detailed "Agreed" responses as there's no reason to think out a response when you can just slap a like on the post.

I've done the 3rd a lot...It has made me a bit lazier, I don't know about everyone else. There's been multiple times in this very thread where I've almost just slapped a like on a comment and moved on but for the purposes of this thread I've told myself I should respond, I wouldn't really do that in other threads, I'll be like "That's a good post, I agree with it, maybe I should write a response...Nah I'll just like it and go do something else"

But if the former two are stronger than it's worth keeping, I wouldn't touch the forum upvotes at this stage as it needs a more detailed breakdown.

Last edited by Ryuu96 - on 03 January 2022

Ryuu96 said:

+ Upvotes could encourage more comments as it's nice to know your comments are appreciated
+ Upvotes stop the spam of "Agreed" posts - Although technically, this is against the rules anyway.
-  Upvotes could cause a decline in detailed "Agreed" responses as there's no reason to think out a response when you can just slap a like on the post.

I also use forum upvotes as a way to tell someone who has quoted me or said something to me that I have read their post when I have nothing meaningful to respond. Which I guess comes under the 2nd point. I think "agrees" are a valuable way to get feedback, I'm sure there might be people who use it instead of posting a detailed response but I think the majority of "agrees" wouldn't translate to any form of post if the feature was removed. I don't view the agree system as harmful in any way.



Gamerscore:20,000  -  Trophies:3,800 -  Nintendo Awards: -1

My Xbox Series S is my baby. It grew up into an X.

Zippy6 said:
Ryuu96 said:

+ Upvotes could encourage more comments as it's nice to know your comments are appreciated
+ Upvotes stop the spam of "Agreed" posts - Although technically, this is against the rules anyway.
-  Upvotes could cause a decline in detailed "Agreed" responses as there's no reason to think out a response when you can just slap a like on the post.

I also use forum upvotes as a way to tell someone who has quoted me or said something to me that I have read their post when I have nothing meaningful to respond. Which I guess comes under the 2nd point. I think "agrees" are a valuable way to get feedback, I'm sure there might be people who use it instead of posting a detailed response but I think the majority of "agrees" wouldn't translate to any form of post if the feature was removed. I don't view the agree system as harmful in any way.

Basically why I would leave it for now, it's hard to say which way it sways without a larger response, likely not going to achieve that in this thread and it may be a me problem of using the agreed system as a lazy way out of responding, lol.

I also sees its benefits and agree with them so it's about weighing them up.

Last edited by Ryuu96 - on 03 January 2022