Should admins have the ability to discard votes, and if so, which admins? Should community mods have that ability? Can you think of any ways that tools like this could be abused?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Basically if someone goes against hive mind once or twice can cause getting removed or limited on their instance.

Except it appears designed for that not actually detection of the bad users. And does nothing when the toxic users just say on their own instance or comm. (like goat, pugjeasus and with recent db0 votes the feddit.org admin)

[–] Blaze@piefed.zip 1 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

If "going against the hivemind" is insulting people (which is what I've seen most of the time with users with both warnings), then it works as intended.

Also, giving a lot of downvotes is usually a sign of toxicity, and that's only based on the user's actions, not the downvotes they receives.

And does nothing when the toxic users just say on their own instance or comm

As I said, it's not a perfect tool. To solve toxic users creating their own communities where they reign alone would require admins stepping in. And in the case you mention, when the person is an admin themselves, there isn't a lot you can imagine, no tool would be able to address that.

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 minutes ago

giving a lot of downvotes is usually a sign of toxicity

Emphasis mine. When is it not a sign of toxicity? Rules are defined by their exceptions, so I am curious as to how this exception is navigated, if at all?

Essentially someone who posts with high frequency has a capacity to issue more downvotes without compromising this admittedly imperfect tool.

Now I was never really a reddit user, but the problematic karma farming of accounts associated with that place was directly linked to these kinds of tools and metrics, no?

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

There has been many times on lemmy and reddit where that is not the case, just saying what people didn't like was enough. From games to politics people love to dogpile. Making a system that helps do that is asinine.

Blaze you do so much for the fediverse but defending this type of system is very disappointing to me.

[–] Blaze@piefed.zip 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I said it above, but I'll rephrase:

a user giving way more downvotes than upvotes than is a sign of toxic behaviour (I insist on "giving", so the user is the only one doing that action, we are not talking about other people's actions)
every time I see a user with warnings, they have both, meaning that they give a lot of downvotes (see previous points), and indeed get downvoted back

The point you are making with people going against the hivemind is related to people receiving a lot of downvotes, but doesn't explain people giving a lot of downvotes.

Blaze you do so much for the fediverse but defending this type of system is very disappointing to me.

I indeed do a lot, and I've seen toxic users going rampant at a few moments. The lemm.ee shutdown due to trolling and toxicity is a sign that we needed a way to identify bad faith trolls and toxic users better to avoid mods and admins burnout.

[–] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 hour ago

The point you are making with people going against the hivemind is related to people receiving a lot of downvotes, but doesn't explain people giving a lot of downvotes.

Because it's treated differently in piefed but still an example of how the software is designed to punish those who do not act the way the creator wants.

It just doesn't seem like a way to actually address bad faith trolls or bad actors just make it easier to purge. Especially with instances that love to keep those types around, see world and shit just works.