this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2024
406 points (97.9% liked)

Fediverse

28490 readers
602 users here now

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!

Rules

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

We had a really interesting discussion yesterday about voting on Lemmy/PieFed/Mbin and whether they should be private or not, whether they are already public and to what degree, if another way was possible. There was a widely held belief that votes should be private yet it was repeatedly pointed out that a quick visit to an Mbin instance was enough to see all the upvotes and that Lemmy admins already have a quick and easy UI for upvotes and downvotes (with predictable results ). Some thought that using ActivityPub automatically means any privacy is impossible (spoiler: it doesn't).

As a response, I’m trying this out: PieFed accounts now have two profiles within them - one used for posting content and another (with no name, profile photo or bio, etc) for voting. PieFed federates content using the main profile most of the time but when sending votes to Mbin and Lemmy it uses the anonymous profile. The anonymous profile cannot be associated with its controlling account by anyone other than your PieFed instance admin(s). There is one and only one anonymous profile per account so it will still be possible to analyze voting patterns for abuse or manipulation.

ActivityPub geeks: the anonymous profile is a separate Actor with a different url. The Activity for the vote has its “actor” field set to the anonymous Actor url instead of the main Actor. PieFed provides all the usual url endpoints, WebFinger, etc for both actors but only provides user-provided PII for the main one.

That’s all it is. Pretty simple, really.

To enable the anonymous profile, go to https://piefed.social/user/settings and tick the ‘Vote privately’ checkbox. If you make a new account now it will have this ticked already.

This will be a bit controversial, for some. I’ll be listening to your feedback and here to answer any questions. Remember this is just an experiment which could be removed if it turns out to make things worse rather than better. I've done my best to think through the implications and side-effects but there could be things I missed. Let's see how it goes.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 10 points 3 months ago (5 children)
[–] hendrik@palaver.p3x.de 3 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Why do you downvote all the stuff anyways?

[–] cabbage@piefed.social 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

PieFed shows us that he has an "attitude" of -40%, which I guess means that of 200 catloaf votes 140 will point downwards. So I guess at least it's nothing personal, he or she is just an active downvoter of things. I guess we all enjoy spending our time differently.

A cool potential feature would be weighted downvotes - giving downvotes form users with higher attitude scores (in PieFed terms) greater significance. But I'm derailing.

[–] hendrik@palaver.p3x.de 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

I've always wanted to ask such a person what their deal is. I mean they could be miserable, or one of the people who always complain about everything. Or it's supposed to be some form of trolling that no one gets... Maybe I shouldn't ask because it's not gonna be a healthy discussion... And I don't care if that happens in an argument. But I really wonder why someone downvotes something like an innocent computer question. Or some comment with correct and uncontroversial advise. Or other people during a healty conversation. It doesn't happen often to me, but I had all of that happen. And maybe thoughts like this lead to the current situation. And some people think about exposing such people and some think it should be protected.

And i think weighing the votes is a realistic idea. We could also not count votes of people with bad attitude at all.

[–] cabbage@piefed.social 4 points 3 months ago

Then again, if there's a method to it and logic behind it, maybe these active downvoters are doing everybody a favour by screening content and downvoting things they consider to be of little value?

I don't know. It would be interesting to hear their motivation for sure.

[–] lvxferre@mander.xyz 3 points 3 months ago

I’ve always wanted to ask such a person what their deal is.

I can't answer for other people but I'm probably in the "low attitude" group, since my older account is at -9% and the current one at +42%. And at least for me it's the result of two factors.

One of them is that old Reddit habits die hard. In Reddit I used to have uBlock Origin hiding the voting buttons from the platform, as a way to avoid contributing with it altogether except in ways that subjectively benefitted me, such as commenting (as I'm verbose, I feel good writing). The exception to the above was typically things so stupid/reddit-like/idiotic that I couldn't help but downvote.

Another is that my "core" values is rather different from what most people in social networks value. As such, a lot of posts/comments are from my PoV overrated (that get downvoted) or underrated (that get upvoted). And due to sorting algorithms I'm seeing high score comments more often, so this yields a higher amount of downvotes.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)