this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2026
-56 points (10.0% liked)

Fediverse

41800 readers
122 users here now

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

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

PS: By definition this was always going to attract downvotes, so I'll pay no attention to that. I just want to be clear about one thing: this proposed feature would (obviously) be read-only and opt-in. It is just a development of the existing block feature. It would affect nobody except those who choose to use it.

PPS: I was originally going to submit it to Lemmy issue tracker but I prefer not to use Microsoft Github so for now I'm putting it here instead.

This is a general proposal that concerns Lemmy specifically, but also other forum-alike software that uses ActivityPub, such as Piefed.

For me, the original sin of social media is downvoting (rant incoming). Specifically, its rampant misuse as a "Me no like!!" button. Apart from conveying totally uninteresting information (i.e. a subjective binary opinion), downvoting encourages schoolyard social dynamics and discourages heterodox views (and therefore debate). The nearest in-person equivalent (saying "shut up") is universally considered rude. At scale, the effect of downvoting is to brutalize a community that might otherwise be pleasant and welcoming. I believe this practice is almost always toxic and poisonous. Those who defend it (in good faith, I do not doubt) need to consider the possibility that it has helped to homogenize their communities into people like them (to caricature: insensitive males). Most ordinary people do not participate actively in social media. There's a reason for that.

No, this is not a popular position here (cf. selection bias) and so it will of course be... downvoted. But it's how I see it. I like to think that I've added some value to the fediverse with my contributions, but if there's one thing that regularly causes me to consider leaving, it's this. Going to Beehiv or Blahaj-whatsit is not a solution, because the communities I'm interested in are not there. Hiding downvote scores does not work because... it does not hide the downvoters.

Which gave me an idea. Given that the identity of downvoters is technically public, I propose a new setting: "Auto-block downvoters". That's it. Automatically hide comments (or posts, or anything) by users who have downvoted your contributions. Logical, no? They don't care for what I have to say, and I don't care for their inane negativity. It's win-win! Lots of possible variants:

  • Hide [ subsequent | all ] comments by users who have downvoted [ a post | a comment | anything ] by you [ in this thread | on this post | in this community | everywhere]
  • Hide [etc] by users with an upvote-downvote ratio lower than [ X ]% etc

Such a setting (especially #1) would immeasurably improve my experience of Lemmy. No exaggeration. I like to think it might also serve as a subtle incentive for users to be more generous and tolerant in their behavior towards others, but that is secondary.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Nemo@slrpnk.net 2 points 37 minutes ago

You may want to edit your post body to include information you clarify later in comments, namely:

You don't want to block users permanently, which is why the current block feature is unsuitable.

You don't want to block users universally, that is, if someone downvotes you in one thread you still want to see their content in others.

You only want to stop seeing comment replies in a single thread (or subthread?) from users who have previously downvoted you in that thread.

Do I have that right? That wouldn't be so bad, I think, though beats me how you'd implement it.

I too get irritated when users misuse the vote buttons, but to my mind the ranked-thread system doesn't work without them. And in the end, they're just numbers: No amount of votes has every made me delete an unpopular comment, either of my own or as a moderator.

[–] MrFinnbean@lemmy.world 16 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Dont you think its inherendly dangerous to just automatically block anyone who disagrees with you?

If you see only comments that agree with you or interract only with people who have the same opinions, your views will never be challenged. Many of the societys problems has its roots in people living in their own bubble.

[–] JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world -3 points 2 hours ago (2 children)

Totally agree, in principle. That's why I don't use that very feature, which already exists - i.e. blocking (permanently). Are you against it?

[–] MrFinnbean@lemmy.world 7 points 55 minutes ago (1 children)

Im against auto-blocking.

The block feature we have now is fine for what it is, because user needs to review case by case if they want to block somebody or not and they will always keep seeing other peoples opinions even if they try to make a bubble for them self.

[–] JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world -1 points 49 minutes ago

The auto-block would be context-specific and temporary, as I described. Essentially it's a fine-tuning of the existing block feature, which I totally agree is excessively heavy-handed (and I don't use it for that reason).

[–] Skavau@piefed.social 1 points 50 minutes ago

There's a difference between manually blocking specific users and having a system set up so you will automatically block anyone who ever downvotes any of your posts or comments.

[–] flamingleg@lemmy.ml 2 points 45 minutes ago (1 children)

wouldn't an option to 'mute' rather than 'block' people achieve the same outcome? that's how it works on twitter iirc

[–] JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world 1 points 43 minutes ago

Sure, that would work fine. Essentially the same thing as far as I can tell. The point is that it would be fine-tunable and automatic, neither of which the current block is.

[–] remon@ani.social 32 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (7 children)

Downvotes are a deliberately built in feature of this platform, so it would be really stupid to have a feature that punished people for using another feature.

If you're this petty about downvotes maybe move to another platform.

[–] mrdown@lemmy.world 1 points 35 minutes ago (1 children)

Which lemmy alternative is alive and has no downvotes?

[–] remon@ani.social 0 points 24 minutes ago (1 children)

No idea, if there isn't OP just has to write one I guess.

[–] mrdown@lemmy.world 0 points 22 minutes ago (1 children)
[–] remon@ani.social 0 points 19 minutes ago (1 children)

This guy text-to-speeches.

[–] mrdown@lemmy.world 0 points 17 minutes ago (1 children)

Same bullshit as if tou don't like the usa just leave. This is 5 years old or lower mentality

[–] remon@ani.social 0 points 15 minutes ago (1 children)

if tou don’t like

This guys shakespeares!

[–] mrdown@lemmy.world 0 points 11 minutes ago (1 children)

You keep confirming that you act like a 5 years old. Acting like typos and language police

[–] remon@ani.social 1 points 8 minutes ago

So stop being so interested in me you damn paedo.

[–] Keshara@piefed.blahaj.zone 20 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

Orrr, move to an instance that has the downvotes disabled. They don't exist if I can't see them ☺️

[–] mrdown@lemmy.world 1 points 34 minutes ago

An instance removing downvotes can still get it's post downvoting by other instance.

[–] JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

The comments still do. As I said in the post.

[–] Keshara@piefed.blahaj.zone 5 points 2 hours ago (4 children)

Okay I just reread your post, as I missed the bit you mentioned about instances like blahaj hiding the downvotes.

So a couple of questions for you.

You mentioned the communities aren't on the instances that hide downvotes.. Are these communities that live on instances that are not federated with for example blahaj.zone?

And also, you mentioned that instances that are hiding downvotes is also not a solution due to the downvoter and others still being able to see the downvotes. So I ask, why is that an issue for you? Why be worried about fake internet points that aren't even really tracked here (unlike Reddit for example), that you can't even see? Actual engagement in discussion between people is far more important no?

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] disevani@lemmy.world 20 points 2 hours ago (18 children)

Hello, i downvoted this because i strongly disagree, but that doesn't mean i'm not open to discuss this (are discussions not why platforms like this exist in the first place?). A downvote doesn't mean i don't care, like you suggest.
People should be allowed to agree AND disagree, and still be allowed to explain why they downvote.

[–] setsubyou@lemmy.world 12 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I disagree with OP too, but I also think downvotes are not great for disagreement. I like them much more for marking something as wrong or off topic. Otherwise we just limit lemmy to a tool that finds the majority opinion, instead of being an actual discussion platform.

For example, OP starts a discussion and your comment that I disagree with is a legitimate opinion, so I won’t downvote either. But if someone tried to derail the discussion by commenting ramen recipes, I might downvote that.

[–] JubilantJaguar@lemmy.world -1 points 51 minutes ago

So we agree in substance. Why then would you be against a feature that would allow you (entirely optionally) not to see the contributions of people who have marked your content as illegitimate? This is what I don't get.

I don't tend to believe in technical fixes, but this particular feature would really improve my experience here. Maybe yours, too.

load more comments (17 replies)
[–] INeedMana@piefed.zip 6 points 2 hours ago (11 children)

Going to Beehiv or Blahaj-whatsit is not a solution, because the communities I’m interested in are not there

As long as the instances are not defederated, you can interact with the communities from other instances. And AFAIK on instances that have downvotes disabled, the vote numbers will also be only from upvotes - I mean, those not only hide the downvote button, but also don't federate in the downvote actions

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›