Re^2: Negative voting (system redesign)

Thanks tye!

I guess I don't think negative votes are a bad thing - I see your point. I suppose I'm not talking about this because I get downvoted particularly often, I just think that a reply with any useful information content, whether eloquent or not, beats negative voting without feedback. And people who get down voted often are the people who would benefit most from some feedback.

Thanks for your thoughts - fair points!

Comment on Re^2: Negative voting (system redesign)

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Negative voting (system redesign) by Anonymous Monk on Aug 07, 2013 at 08:51 UTC
And people who get down voted often are the people who would benefit most from some feedback. some folks are quite immune to feedback, trying to engage them with constructive-feedback is quite pointless, there isn't enough time in the day to accomplish nothing repeatedly -- downvote (if ye can) and move on	[reply]
Re^3: Negative voting (system redesign) by Argel (Prior) on Aug 07, 2013 at 20:59 UTC
I just think that a reply with any useful information content, whether eloquent or not, beats negative voting without feedback. And people who get down voted often are the people who would benefit most from some feedback. How could you read several threads on downvoting and still be so naive?!? Anyway.... One obvious reason for downvoting without, or in lieu of, an explanation is if someone else has already provided a good explanation. It's not like that magically exonerates the offending node. Massive downvoting could even help drive home the point (if the recipient is open to learning, or at least open to accepting/adapting to the way things are). And I'm pretty sure that spammers will not be reading any explanations, but a certain number of downvotes are necessary before a node is reaped. Regardless, your post is a good reminder that constructive criticism can be very beneficial, so thanks for asking. Elda Taluta; Sarks Sark; Ark Arks My deviantART gallery	[reply]