The reason is simple. Bad actors have less time to disagree. Forcing people to engage drowns out shills and limits their influence significantly.
Keep an eye on it, sure. Give it time and then tell me I'm wrong.
If 100% of people voted, stealing an election wouldn't be possible.
If 100% of people speak up, the shill noise reveals itself.
A community that can encourage less lurkers has an extreme advantage when it comes to free speech.
Bad actors have less time to disagree.
Why? What does that even mean?
Forcing people to engage drowns out shills and limits their influence significantly.
Well then why have upvotes? We’ll just leave comments that we agree!
If 100% of people voted, stealing an election wouldn't be possible.
Not only is it irrelevant, I dont even agree with it. It just means a bunch of stupid uninformed people are voting.
What the fuck is a shill? You keep repeating it over and over like it means something. I don’t think you know. As far as I can tell its just Q parlance for anyone that is skeptical of Q.
I dont need to give it time. I used Voat which had downvoting, and it was way better than this. The benefits of downvoting outweigh the cons. Same with guns and free speech. I dont need to think about it.
downvotes are just too dangerous, it’s too much power for any single user to have.
Get out.
You really have a cringe way of losing an argument.
Are you employed, mam?
Two bad faith arguments.
First you assert that I have somehow lost the debate.
Then you try to infer that Im out of work in order to perpetrate an ad hominem.
Again, this is your idea of “legitimate” argumentation? To me these are the tactics of a bad actor. I thought no downvotes were supposed to take care of problems like you?
Maybe instead of engaging in shadey tactics you either
1.) respect my preference for downvotes
2.) try to make a logical good faith argument
Good faith argument does not include
”because youre wrong”
“because I win”
“because Im better than you”
Those are garbage arguments
Is it free speech if a sub bans me?
Is it free speech if a user blocks me?
Isnt that an infringement of free speech? Isnt your defense of free speech totally arbitrary?
Why wont you define a shill and state why you dont think he should have free speech? What is a shill? Answer the question.
You actually don’t care about free speech or you wouldnt have such a problem with my opinion. All your arguments are typical of reddit leftists: “we don’t allow those opinions here. We’re all better off if you don’t voice them”
You thought you would just throw your fat ass around and dictate to me how I should think about the lack of downvoting. You haven’t given me a single rationale for why Poal shouldnt allow downvotes. Just “because I said so” and “do your part!” . Is this the part where you tell me to wear a mask? Fail.
(post is archived)