You simply cannot have free speech and policed speech simultaneously.
The policy restricts free speech as the down vote is one of the most basic forms of speech.
Either accept POAL is NOT about free speech, or remove the policy.
Right now it is utter hypocrisy.
might want to reconsider relabeling the downvote button. Trusting people to use it only for spam and also punishing users that overuse it doesn't work well when the user base grows. How can he expect to police 100,000 users? Simply changing the downvote button to something more like saidit's "humor" button might be a better path forward.
Change the button and reduce your stress, Boobs.
It would also help them stop being hypocritical assholes.
I would agree except I'm unclear of what getting downvoted does when you get enough of them. If getting downvoted can lead to bans or your content is hidden or whatever then it is not really speech, you're taking action against someone.
So if downvoting only affected your downvote count and nothing else then I'm all for it. If not then it will be abused by those that want to silence you.
Don't yell at me
Just make the down arrow a garbage can. Press the garbage can, and then it disappears.
Just for yourself?
This wouldn't be a bad idea. And then also let a user decide a threshold of how many downvotes should mean that a comment or post should be hidden for you.
Then it needs to be removed.
Sorry about the yelling, been attacked all morning with no debate.
Having an unpopular opinion is not censorship.
But the faggots here think I shouldn't be able to express disapproval, only approval.
These coddled children have no clue what free speech really is, hint, it's not being able to swear or call someone a faggot.
Policy is by definition a form of policing.
A free speech site would allow users to USE it FREELY as in however they want.
Downvote just cause you hate the user, fair and free.
Downvote just cause you hate the post, fair and free.
Downvote for whatever reason, fair and free.
Only downvote "spam", POLICED.
If it was just a form of speech then yea.
But getting downvoted has consequences on this platform beyond that of people no longer listening to you. I don't agree it's just speech as long as this is true.
Plus you can reply whatever you want to whoever you want, it's not like downvoting is "nigger" on poal and you can't say it. It's a feature that they wanted to use for spam filtering.
I don't think downvoting as it stands should be allowed without consequence, but I'm also open to a rework.
If the community wants you silenced, isn't that right that you be silenced? Or at least shushed?
Not if a community of faggot nigger kikes rises up and overwhelms everyone with alts. There's gotta be some rework if we're gonna allow downvoting to be more accessible.
What the fuck are you talking about. If you disagree, say it you fucking homo
By downvoting, you're technically policing speech? Isn't that right you disgusting kike?
You got your libertarianism all jumbled up... Free Speech doesn't mean its free from criticism, it means its free from censorship. If people don't have cues that they are presenting in an unwelcome fashion, it forces in the long run an increase in unwanted behavior; in general lowering the level of discourse.
Not everyone has time to write out a reasoned dissertation on something when 100 people just saying its shit will suffice. Social enforcement is not the same thing as top-down censorship. (and ironically punishing people for downvoting is effectively top-down censorship of the smallest voices)
(post is archived)