this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2026
-80 points (8.3% liked)

Fediverse

41817 readers
215 users here now

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, Mbin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!

Rules

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

PPPS: Here is a totally clarified title: An option to automatically block downvoters with configurable granularity for the scope of the block. See text for detail.

PS: By definition this was always going to attract downvotes, so I'll pay no attention to that. I just want to be clear about one thing: this proposed feature would (obviously) be read-only and opt-in. It is just a development of the existing block feature. It would affect nobody except those who choose to use it.

PPS: I was originally going to submit it to Lemmy issue tracker but I prefer not to use Microsoft Github so for now I'm putting it here instead.

This is a general proposal that concerns Lemmy specifically, but also other forum-alike software that uses ActivityPub, such as Piefed.

For me, the original sin of social media is downvoting (rant incoming). Specifically, its rampant misuse as a "Me no like!!" button. Apart from conveying totally uninteresting information (i.e. a subjective binary opinion), downvoting encourages schoolyard social dynamics and discourages heterodox views (and therefore debate). The nearest in-person equivalent (saying "shut up") is universally considered rude. At scale, the effect of downvoting is to brutalize a community that might otherwise be pleasant and welcoming. I believe this practice is almost always toxic and poisonous. Those who defend it (in good faith, I do not doubt) need to consider the possibility that it has helped to homogenize their communities into people like them (to caricature: insensitive males). Most ordinary people do not participate actively in social media. There's a reason for that.

No, this is not a popular position here (cf. selection bias) and so it will of course be... downvoted. But it's how I see it. I like to think that I've added some value to the fediverse with my contributions, but if there's one thing that regularly causes me to consider leaving, it's this. Going to Beehiv or Blahaj-whatsit is not a solution, because the communities I'm interested in are not there. Hiding downvote scores does not work because... it does not hide the downvoters.

Which gave me an idea. Given that the identity of downvoters is technically public, I propose a new setting: "Auto-block downvoters". That's it. Automatically hide comments (or posts, or anything) by users who have downvoted your contributions. Logical, no? They don't care for what I have to say, and I don't care for their inane negativity. It's win-win! Lots of possible variants:

  • Hide [ subsequent | all ] comments by users who have downvoted [ a post | a comment | anything ] by you [ in this thread | on this post | in this community | everywhere]
  • Hide [etc] by users with an upvote-downvote ratio lower than [ X ]% etc

Such a setting (especially #1) would immeasurably improve my experience of Lemmy. No exaggeration. I like to think it might also serve as a subtle incentive for users to be more generous and tolerant in their behavior towards others, but that is secondary.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FinchHaven@sfba.social 1 points 12 minutes ago

@JubilantJaguar

So

Let me see if I understand you

You only want to see

  1. opinions you like, or

  2. no opinions at all

Let me see if I can do my small part to help you

Bye…

[–] mesamunefire@piefed.social 1 points 1 hour ago

You know, I could see a feature where if someone mass downvotes a certain percentage of your posts, then block them in some manner.

Like if someone made a script to downvote ALL your posts or something of that nature. But I personally havent seen something like that in the fedi before. But it was something reddit had a problem with. Bots downvoting so their own posts got to the top before anyone else.

I dont think blanket blocking downvoting people is a good thing though. As others have said,it will undermine the purpose of the voting, for visibility.

[–] homes@piefed.world 4 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

I use a mobile client to browse, and it uses swipes for both voting and for navigation, which means sometimes I accidentally downvote stuff before going back and correcting it. That means that both myself and other people who use this client would accidentally get banned just for downvoting by mistake.

[–] Comrade_Spood@quokk.au 5 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

There are literally instances already that disable downvotes on them, like blahaj.zone. You don't need to have an auto-block feature for it on top of that.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Hairyfishnuts@feddit.online 6 points 5 hours ago

Have one for the road.

[–] MrFinnbean@lemmy.world 31 points 7 hours ago (14 children)

Dont you think its inherendly dangerous to just automatically block anyone who disagrees with you?

If you see only comments that agree with you or interract only with people who have the same opinions, your views will never be challenged. Many of the societys problems has its roots in people living in their own bubble.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 3 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

So if you think about this. Out of the people that downvote some will and will put an explanation for why they down vote. You want to not see these so that you will have less of an idea on why your post got downvoted. Do I understand the idea behind this?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] remon@ani.social 44 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (15 children)

Downvotes are a deliberately built in feature of this platform, so it would be really stupid to have a feature that punished people for using another feature.

If you're this petty about downvotes maybe move to another platform.

[–] Keshara@piefed.blahaj.zone 25 points 8 hours ago (10 children)

Orrr, move to an instance that has the downvotes disabled. They don't exist if I can't see them ☺️

[–] mrdown@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago

An instance removing downvotes can still get it's post downvoting by other instance.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
[–] disevani@lemmy.world 29 points 8 hours ago (23 children)

Hello, i downvoted this because i strongly disagree, but that doesn't mean i'm not open to discuss this (are discussions not why platforms like this exist in the first place?). A downvote doesn't mean i don't care, like you suggest.
People should be allowed to agree AND disagree, and still be allowed to explain why they downvote.

[–] setsubyou@lemmy.world 13 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

I disagree with OP too, but I also think downvotes are not great for disagreement. I like them much more for marking something as wrong or off topic. Otherwise we just limit lemmy to a tool that finds the majority opinion, instead of being an actual discussion platform.

For example, OP starts a discussion and your comment that I disagree with is a legitimate opinion, so I won’t downvote either. But if someone tried to derail the discussion by commenting ramen recipes, I might downvote that.

[–] kionay@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

it's probably impossible to get downvotes to be anything other than agree/disagree buttons at this point, but I like to dream of a world where it's for contributes-to-productive-conversation/mindless-nonsense-or-hate-speech.

Downvotes should only be for posts like

lol this ^

I've never been able to imagine a system that could convince random users to use it like that, though.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)
[–] Nemo@slrpnk.net 5 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

You may want to edit your post body to include information you clarify later in comments, namely:

You don't want to block users permanently, which is why the current block feature is unsuitable.

You don't want to block users universally, that is, if someone downvotes you in one thread you still want to see their content in others.

You only want to stop seeing comment replies in a single thread (or subthread?) from users who have previously downvoted you in that thread.

Do I have that right? That wouldn't be so bad, I think, though beats me how you'd implement it.

I too get irritated when users misuse the vote buttons, but to my mind the ranked-thread system doesn't work without them. And in the end, they're just numbers: No amount of votes has every made me delete an unpopular comment, either of my own or as a moderator.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] DishaweslemOride@lemmy.org -1 points 3 hours ago

Why don’t you just be like Lemmy.world admins and stop federating specific users to avoid having their ban be in the modlog.

[–] INeedMana@piefed.zip 8 points 8 hours ago (19 children)

Going to Beehiv or Blahaj-whatsit is not a solution, because the communities I’m interested in are not there

As long as the instances are not defederated, you can interact with the communities from other instances. And AFAIK on instances that have downvotes disabled, the vote numbers will also be only from upvotes - I mean, those not only hide the downvote button, but also don't federate in the downvote actions

load more comments (19 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›