feel like they can be very useful

  • RGB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    This can also go the same way for upvotes. If you have to put some thought into a disagreement you should do the same for agreement. So upvotes should be removed too so the platform just operates on voiced agreement or disagreement in the comments.

    • alyaza [they/she]@beehaw.orgM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      This can also go the same way for upvotes. If you have to put some thought into a disagreement you should do the same for agreement. So upvotes should be removed too so the platform just operates on voiced agreement or disagreement in the comments.

      well, even if we wanted to do this we couldn’t–it’s not toggleable on our end. but if you want to get a simulacrum of this experience i believe that’s essentially what turning off scores does, which you can do in your user settings.

    • lyam23@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There is a still a need to surface and prioritize good discussion. Upvotes remain a pretty good way of doing this, especially when removing the downvotes.

      • RGB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why not surface communities based on activity. As in how active the comments section is. That way agreements and disagreements are weighed equally.

        • lyam23@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I’d be interested in seeing that experiment in the comment section. It could be implemented with another filter (similar to the “Activity” filter in the post listing, I’d guess). Still, this wouldn’t present a qualitative difference between “good” and “bad” discussion. But it might surface “interesting” discussion for a certain type of member.

        • frogman@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          i feel like this incentivises ‘controversial’ posting. content that is designed to illicit a response, good or bad. i feel like this is another avenue to creating an inflammatory space.