Re: RFC: Hide Very Bad Answers From Visitors

[anonymized user 468275]

A down-vote is not a vote to censor. Or as one biographer wrote, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Indeed, it could be said that votes on one thing being counted as votes for something more drastic is what makes the Brexit democratically unsafe. Could always have a separate voting button (up, down, censor).

[jdporter]

Except this isn't about censorship. It's about saying "this node is sufficiently $#!tty that innocent passers-by shouldn't be subjected to it".

[anonymized user 468275]

It's more innocent to be anonymous? I suppose that might be true in an increasingly repressive world, which I perhaps have to concur is the case.

[LanX]

> increasingly repressive world

How many social networks do you know which allow to post anonymously?

[LanX]

I never use down-votes for simple disagreement, that's where I use non-votes.

IMHO down-votes are meant for inappropriate content or behavior.

It's the equivalent of throwing eggs, not the opposite of applauding.

For me this patch is just a variant of the "reap"-consideration, which always existed (IIRC) and isn't censoring either because you can always log in and read the original posting.

[Corion]

For me this patch is just a variant of the "reap"-consideration

This is exactly why I'm very ambivalent about this change.

We already have a process in place for removing nodes from the public eye, and this adds a second way that bypasses the established process.

[LanX]

Yep we should wait and see.

At the moment it's hard to say how the dynamic goes.

But I'm expecting less reaps in the future.

And I think it depends a lot on the decision algorithm.

What I don't like is to have to separate entities for similar functionality, which raises the software complexity even more...

[Anonymous Monk]

Thats quite a unique attitude not shared by most voters for the last 2 decades

[Your Mother]

Says you, nobody, speaking for most users. No support, no identity, no citations, plus a sloppy comparison of unique v most.