The Zeitgeist of the internet of the 20s is considerably less kind to people who form their own thoughts.

This rings true and it may come from the wider world. Seems to me that we have entered an era of fear and pessimism. Partly as a result of that, today’s younger generation had protected childhoods and now, given the state of the world, they themselves are afraid for their futures (with some justification). All this is creating an atmosphere of hypersensitivity, aversion to causing offense, a general lack of openness to new ideas and contradiction.

Nothing I say there is particularly original and I can’t offer data to support it. But my anecdotal experience on this forum and elsewhere backs up the hypothesis completely. Something has changed.

Well, this is certainly one way to goose the participation on Lemmy.

My email provider kept blocking my DeltaChat-created messages, and indeed locking me out of my account for them. Presumably because the encrypted gobbledygook looks likes spam. The open nature of email really is its Achilles heel, unfortunately.

Paper books won’t be available either. You’ll be watching ads in your cabin where the woods used to be.

English requires you to say “a cat” or “the cat”

Generally true but not for abstract nouns and mass nouns: “The water’s warm”, “I’d like a water”, “Water is a liquid”.

PS. It’s called the zero article.

Yes, others have suggested that too. Thanks.

Unsure if you’re even being serious here. The relevancy of the subject matter is not in question. The issue at hand is that people are downvoting opinions. Forgive my directness but if an opinion does not hold value in the context of the community, that seems to me just a waffly way of saying that the opinion is not welcome in the community without actually saying it.

Factually incorrect, sure. But do you not see that your other criteria are very subjective? Rights, suffering, decency, these are all slippery non-binary concepts. Others may define them differently from you. Presumably you don’t think that others are not allowed to have their own opinions, yet in effect you’re telling them that. I think I already know which way you vote and, believe it or not, I vote that way too. But in my understanding of history, treating the views of others as invalid is generally a dangerous path to be on.

Personally, I use downvotes to say “I disagree with this and/or it is a stupid/bad/bigoted/etc take, but I do not wish to spend the time and effort to respond and get dragged into a text-based mudfight

So far, a great articulation of what (I guess) most downvoters are thinking.

with someone who is unlikely to speak to me politely, no matter how polite I try to be in my rebuttal.”

But I’m not sure you’re being honest with yourself here. Certainly not if you’re talking about my comments, which are always polite if sometimes a bit forthright because I’m a direct kind of person.

I like having a way to say “no, bad, stop that”

Nicely put, again. But then: why should your antagonist “stop that”? They should shut up just because you disagree with them?

We come back to the crucial element: civility. If one believes in free speech, and the right of others to have their own opinions and to have a voice, I still see absolutely justification for downvoting a thoughtfully expressed opinion.

I don’t agree with you here but I respect your right to have an opinion and I would never think of downvoting you for it. If that comes across as sanctimonious, so be it. I prefer to see it as just coherent with values. Which I’m sure you share, by the way.

Really helpful. Gonna act on this information.

Without downvoting that content will instead show as something with few upvotes and more or less be blended normally with the rest of the comments.

To confirm: an unpopular comment posted on downvoting-enabled Site A will show higher when viewed on downvoting-disabled Site B? Or only if it was actually posted on Site B?

This is an excellent point, very perceptive and well expressed, and the first time somebody has actually said it. I know it already and I do try to do as you suggest. The problem is that I have a bit of a combative personality so it’s a real struggle, especially when I feel I’m choosing my words very intentionally so that nothing is literally insulting or wrong or falsifiable. A combative lawyer basically, what could possibly go wrong? I often wish I could be more emollient and compromising in my attitude to others, I really do admire it when I see it in others. But alas personality is something very hard to change. So yeah, thanks for the insightful and constructive feedback. And take an upvote to add to your overflowing and deserved collection.

the option to join an instance with downvoting disabled

Having trouble wrapping my mind around this. The post is on Site A. My comment is on Site B. The evil downvoter sees it on Site C. Um - what happens next?

turn off the vote tallies yourself in your account settings

Already did that, the exact number is a waste of screen space.

I don’t deny that voting is helpful when it’s used to rate the quality of the contribution - i.e. whether or not it adds values, makes you think. But to vote based on how much you subjectively agree or disagree is completely useless, it’s all about the person voting and nothing about the comment. It adds literally nothing and when it’s a downvote it stifles and poisons the atmosphere too. Anyway, I’ve made my point.

Not bad advice, admittedly

Yeah I know that I’m courting downvotes here but that doesn’t disprove my argument.

My argument is that downvoting opinions expressed in a thoughtful way is just uncivil. It degrades the atmosphere. It causes the less thick-skinned to shut up, to self-censor, to leave. The inevitable result will be less civil conversation, less participants, and - to caricature it a bit - just a bunch of guys shouting and snarking and sniping and generally “not giving a shit”.

And let’s be honest, you probably are a guy. I am too BTW.

Obviously my argument is being confirmed by the response to this comment. Seriously guys - I would bet that you’re all guys - you’ll regret it when you’re left with nobody to talk to but other cynics and nihilists and mindless jokers.

functionally the downvote button is the “I had a negative reaction to this button” and the up vote is the “I had a positive reaction to this button”

Exactly this.

Some of my favorite comments have loads of downvotes and to me it just makes whatever dumb shit I said funnier

If you’re talking about your comments, and you laugh at others who downvote them, then well done. But I submit that most humans are not so thick-skinned.

There’s also the question of visibility: downvoting a comment is not just saying “You’re wrong”, it’s making the comment less visible to others. A form of censorship, basically. I personally find it extremely annoying and unfair when it happens.

Perhaps it also has to do with how much time and thought you put into the offending comment.

Semi-tangential. Every time I get downvoted, I move an inch closer to the exit door of this community.

I’m talking about comments rather than posts, of course. And it should go without saying that the comments in question do not contain factual errors or even rudeness. Just pure opinion, expressed civilly.

Downvoting is, almost always, poisonous behavior in an online community. It is just as poisonous as saying “Shut up” to someone in a real-life social situation.

IMO the corporate social networks get this fact better than the literalist geeky types and other well-meaning idealists to be found in this forum.

Mouse? The thing that sat on a pad next to a box of floppy disks?

Pet theory: most Dvorak users were, in their pre-enlightenment lives, messy freestyle 3-finger typists. If you ever went to the trouble of formally learning to touch-type Qwerty, moving to another layout just seems impossibly foreboding. No way.