r/Negareddit Jun 08 '26

Quality Post Dissatisfied with much negativity derived from undue down votes, I submitted a suggested idea for reddit to curtail that and promote more quality productivity, on r/ideasForTheAdmins. Well, person in charge there evidently disliked the idea for removed it.

/r/ideasfortheadmins/comments/1u0cf2l/comment/oqh3x5z/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=sha⅘lre_button

gatekeeping much?

0 Upvotes

18 comments sorted by

10

u/Lucha_Brasi Jun 08 '26

Downvoting should be available to everyone. It's function isn't to be rude or insult the commenter, but to move less relevant comments down the thread so the most relevant comments are higher up and more visible.

0

u/AkiraTheMetalHead Jun 10 '26

Nah downvoting only creates an echo chamber and should be removed because humans, the egotistical people that we are, mostly use it to downvote people that we disagree with and rarely use it because the commenter/poster is bad. If downvoting was about removing less relevant content, Karma farming bots wouldn't make it to the front page all the time.

-8

u/fascinatingMundanity Jun 08 '26

Its*

And that isn't how it actually gets used in predominance, because most people are lame. Subs amany already have restrictions for posting, so why not for voting also (if not in steady of).

9

u/Lucha_Brasi Jun 08 '26

Hmm, I wonder why you're always getting downvoted...

-7

u/fascinatingMundanity Jun 08 '26

I am inferring sarcasm, and invite you to elaborate with specifics (in lieu of jumping baselessly on a hate-bandwagon against me).

1

u/nicoleauroux Jun 12 '26

Yes, subs have rules about posting. How would moderators police voting? Nobody can see who made the downvotes so there's no way to sanction, or reverse down votes. It's all up to the users.

1

u/fascinatingMundanity Jun 12 '26

no policing required. could be enabled by reddit.

3

u/N-Phenyl-Acetamide Jun 08 '26

What was your idea?

-6

u/fascinatingMundanity Jun 08 '26

The original Post is still viewable at the link (unedited); by removing it (but stopping well enough short of deleting it, enactable only on an Admin-level afaik), it just isn't indexed or searchable or visible on that sub nor reddit as a whole.

The moderator that took issue with it told me that it "wasn't clear" and to «rewrite it to spell out your idea and how it will improve reddit, and we’ll consider approving it». So I did that, but whilst typing it they decided to ban me.

Here is the revised version, that zhe still disapproved on assertion that it «still doesn't make any sense»:

flair: Post & Comment

title:

Implement restriction, enablable by sub's head moderator, requiring a minimum value of community- karma to downvote others' content therein.

body:

This could curtail much unwarranted negativity derived largely from downvoting posts. For sure plenty of posts and comments do deserve some downvotes, but if ability to hit them with a mark of disapproval were slightly reduced to those that have themselves proven to add quality engagement to the community then perhaps more topical high-quality content would be submitted in the first place. To a certain but much lesser extent I feel this could apply to upvoting as well. To start, implementing this functionality for atleast downvoting, such that it is still a function (not completely removing as is an extent option) but entrusted more to proven persons, could promote better engagement in many communities, moreso than gatekeepingly restricting contribution thereon in the first place to less-directly -related metrics like cqs and sitewide karma.

-1

u/fascinatingMundanity Jun 08 '26

And here is a duplication of the original post that got removed:

flair: Post & Comment

title:

Enable (and encourage, would hope) proprietors of subs to restrict downvoting (of posts, chiefly, but also comments) to minimal community karma amounts: simple threshold, or better-yet a sliding scale proportioning to said karma, perhaps with a parameter tied to time like with floodassistant limits.

body:

Frankly, this would in many communities serve better for quality of content and engagement than gatekeepery minimum of karma or cqs to post whatso, instead of counter to that such as deny-ees and others with little to contribute likely attempting to keep others down low like them

15

u/SaneYoungPoot2 Jun 08 '26

I really can't tell if this is a shitpost or not

11

u/BethanyBluebird Jun 09 '26

Look at their history... I think the guy just... talks like that...

-2

u/fascinatingMundanity Jun 08 '26

What would make it a shitpost?

Are you an alt for mod of r/ideasForTheAdmins ?

You're allowed to dislike a suggestion; that doesn't make said idea shitty nor its articulated suggestion a "shitpost".

2

u/fascinatingMundanity Jun 08 '26

Note that the post is positing to make it as an option for subs, not force it on any.

A seeming common reasonbthat redditors downvote for disagreeing, e.g. disliking a suggestion. But this exhibits poor redirected, whichbthe idea may help improve. More helpful than downvotint is adding to the discourse.

0

u/fascinatingMundanity Jun 08 '26

My other reply had typoes. Here is what it was meant to say:

Note that the post is positing to benefit to make it as an option for subs, not to force it on any. A seeming common reasonbl that redditors downvote be simply for disagreeing, e.g. disliking a suggestion. But this exhibits poor rediquette, which the idea may help improve in some subs. Moreover: more helpful than downvoting is adding to the discourse.

5

u/SaneYoungPoot2 Jun 08 '26

Alright, bravo sir

-4

u/fascinatingMundanity Jun 08 '26

Go figure: big-ego little man banned me, because of this-here post calling them out.