>A downvote subconsciously trains people to fall into the same mode of thinking, which leads to hivemind gayness.
You can say, and I am, the same thing about upvotes training people into the hivemind. Which goes into my first point which wasn't understood: having unlimited upvotes, which can have an unwarranted impact, should mean we have unlimited downvotes.
>However, this is a privately owned site and you have no rights here.
I never made claim to any 'rights' here. And we all know that completely faggot 'private site' argument.
>You're at the mercy of the admin.
Exactly my point. And, in this case just like I was accused of, I feel there is very little reason, if any at all, to limit one vote over the other outside of an emotional reason.
>I like this one...
I'm a huge fan of calling a spade a spade. If you don't want people to downvote outside of your ToS, maybe it's time you changed it. Because obviously people get emotional on both sides of the debate. So, why not just Spade-It-Up™ and do away with votes, or just the downvote, and add in an obvious "Protect Poal" or "Spam" button?
Do away with voting entirely: site becomes vulnerable to forum sliding attacks because there's nothing driving popular posts to the top.
Ok let's throw in a spam button to filter out the garbage. What happens when the Spam Threshold is triggered? Post gets deleted? That's a more severe form of censorship than downvotes. This is actually my gripe about comments that get hidden after being downvoted enough. Looking at you, Reddit and Voat.
Let users enable a "hide spam posts" option? This does nothing because obviously everybody is going to enable it, effectively deleting posts that are unpopular. And let's not pretend the spam button won't be used as a downvote button, because it will.
I think Poal chose the lesser of two evils. It's obvious how unlimited downvotes can be abused, we've all seen that happen. And yeah upvotes can emotionally influence, but I don't think it has as much of an impact as a downvote. After all, the human mind is more careful about avoiding pain than receiving rewards. Maybe upvotes could be limited somehow, I think that would be interesting to try. Give users an "allowance" based on time with a bonus based on total contributions? Idk. There's no magic solution.
Lesser of Two Evils is the Evil.
Very true. The internet is a failed experiment
(post is archived)