http://qs1969.pair.com?node_id=11144576


in reply to Re^3: RFC: Policy regarding abuses of the voting system
in thread RFC: Policy regarding abuses of the voting system

"Venting" is far too mild a word. It's an abuse of the voting system, and we all know it.

how do you know any given chunk of downvoting is indiscriminate?

When a user casts all, or nearly all, of their votes for the day, for days on end, merely downvoting old nodes of one particular user, that's not doing one's moderatorily duty, that's abusive. No one says: "Hm, I discovered this one post by Jo Blo which is pretty bad, I'll downvote it; now I'll spend a few hours checking to see if anything else he's posted also merits a downvote." No, rather, they say: "Jo Blo is a blight on the Monastery and my only power is to downvote all his nodes." And that's what we want to discourage.

  • Comment on Re^4: RFC: Policy regarding abuses of the voting system

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: RFC: Policy regarding abuses of the voting system
by Fletch (Bishop) on Jun 09, 2022 at 14:36 UTC

    OK, that's what I was trying to discern; "downvoting for days on end" is a reasonable qualifier for abusive. With that as an explicit qualifier (descript(ion|or)? explanation?) for what's "massive downvoting" then I'd be much more comfortable with point one.

    The cake is a lie.
    The cake is a lie.
    The cake is a lie.

      Thank you.

      Also, people should be aware that we can see the exact time that each vote is cast. We can tell when a user spent mere seconds, or even less, between votes. :-)

        Side note: I am, and have been, running ajax voting code in my browser so I can vote as fast as I can click the icons I use for thumbs up and thumbs down without pressing “Stubmit” and waiting for the page to reload. :P

      downvoting for days on end" is a reasonable qualifier for abusive

      no, all that means is you like reading poor quality nodes - whats next you're gonna ban reading bad books?