Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

1.4K

1) Include a commonly used feature on social media sites. 2) Punish users who use that feature. 3) ?? 4) Profit?

Copied from the searchvoat forum about Voat alternatives:

"POAL was pretty bad, they didn't understand the common useage of the downvote button. I asked their Admin about that policy, and they told me that I could thumb-down posts and I would be ok as long as I wasn't predatory and went after specific users. The next think I know, I went from a positive 60 rating, to negative 100+. They claim "Say what you want" then censor you into oblivion! I don't need them! They can run their little comfort blanket circle jerk echo chamber without me!"

1) Include a commonly used feature on social media sites. 2) Punish users who use that feature. 3) ?? 4) Profit? Copied from the searchvoat forum about Voat alternatives: "POAL was pretty bad, they didn't understand the common useage of the downvote button. I asked their Admin about that policy, and they told me that I could thumb-down posts and I would be ok as long as I wasn't predatory and went after specific users. The next think I know, I went from a positive 60 rating, to negative 100+. They claim "Say what you want" then censor you into oblivion! I don't need them! They can run their little comfort blanket circle jerk echo chamber without me!"

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (30).
[–] • 0 pt

I get it. It was an example. Some people deserve the downvote. That is my point. It should not be: only if the content is in the wrong place (aside from rule breaking). Check the "funny" section and you will see.

[–] • 1 pt

I'm not seeing many good examples where downvotes are needed that isn't spam or against site rules. We are about letting people speak.

[–] • 0 pt

Again. "Letting people speak" Did I say the contrary? I agree with you, let anyone speak anything (that does not break the rules).

But if you send something that is hated by or disagreed by 99% of the website, why not allow the website to CURE the content by downvote bad content?

Why only use the downvote to signal wrong category? Technical rule?

[–] • 1 pt

Wrong category, technical rule, plus sliding, repetitive posting, extremely low effort posts, etc

If what can be said is governed by the majority, it tends to push people toward herd behavior, since any fringe opinion is just ignored. You not only get a selection (people who are different voluntarily find somewhere else to go), but also behavior modification (people start posting what they think others want to hear, rather than their own conscience).

If you look carefully at some of the goats here I think you'll notice somewhat of a conformist streak. I don't think that's by chance.

Anyway, if it makes you feel any better. Any time you upvote something, every post you didn't upvote is moved down. It's kind of lile giving every post a massive downvote at once.