I have heard a few different strategies for this. For example “Upvote everything, even if you disagree with it, if it contributes to discussion”. But my concern with this strategy is that it means the first posted comments just get upvoted the highest regardless of their quality relative to other comments (as all comments which contribute to discussion get upvoted).
So, my questions for lemmy:
- How do you hand out upvotes and why?
- If somebody could leave you a tip on your comment or post if they liked it (3c, $1, whatever), would you be interested in that functionality? Nostr has this and I find it pretty fun. I would hand out tips here but there is no functionality for it.
People upvote everything they agree with, downvote everything they disagree with.
That’s the reality, no matter what they say.
You can easily see this in a thread where two dissenting opinions are present: one opinion gets upvoted consistently, the other gets downvoted consistently, and it’s not based on the quality of their prose.
I upvoted your comment because I agree with it! On a serious note you are right though.
I disagree with your opinion, yet I haven’t downvoted it.
This is what you think and probably a lot of people share your opinion, and I consider that valid even if I disagree.
I reserve my downvotes for rude people, people who spread misinformation, who really got the answer wrong, or who are trolling or riling people up.
People are not all the same, all following one single set of behaviors. All we can do is try to figure out trends, ratios, stuff like that.
Prose is certainly no good indication of anything either. I could write up some fantastic bullshit with great prose if the mood struck me.
Hot take: And there is nothing wrong with this.
Given a large enough population density, there will be enough variety of opinions to bring up the quality line.
Of course, we know what happens when a large percentage of that population is LLMs, which I pinky promise I am not one of.
groupthink is not exclusive to small populations