Censorship is interfering with free speech. Down-voting doesn't do that.
It's exactly what it does. It's surpresas a voice simply because they are saying something you don't want them to say.
Does it stop someone from expressing themselves? Does it prevent others from reading the post? I don't see that happening. Didn't happen at Voat. A downvote doesn't delete a post or ban a user.
Even on voat it frequently collapsed comments; depending on access method. It also negatively shapes perception of future readers. In fact, frequently a -1 resulted in blind down votes by others. A common side effect of numbered, vote based systems. It also provides an excuse to prevent discussion ("not worth my time"). All of which are inversely related to the purpose and benefits of free speech.
That's just not true. Deplorablepoetry had negative ccp, his posting rate was then automatically throttled and limited. To me THAT is limiting free speech. Silencing those you disagree with.
How each individual uses the downvote is up to the individual.
Some use it to voice disapproval.
Here it is policed.
NOT FREE SPEECH.
Does limiting down votes prevent you from discussing and engaging with the people with whom you disagree?
If the answer is yes, please explain.
If the answer is no, then you are wrong and it is not effecting free speech.
Pretty reasonably it seems to force discussion and exchange of perceptions and ideas rather than squelch, limit, or hinder free speach? How is forcing you to participate in discussion, destroying or injuring your free speech?
Nothing about right to free speech guarantees the right to be listened to
Downvoting is a form of speech.
It is policed.
This is a policed speech website.
(post is archived)