Post History

50%

+3 −3

People will be afraid to say what they really mean. If you don't have enough conviction in your judgement that something is wrong, then it's not worth listening to in the first place. If this di...

posted 2y ago by Lundin‭ · edited 2y ago by Lundin‭

Answer

#2: Post edited by

Lundin‭ · 2022-02-10T16:49:44Z (about 2 years ago)

Copy Link

Raw

Markdown

> People will be afraid to say what they really mean.
> If you don't have enough conviction in your judgement that something is wrong, then it's not worth listening to in the first place. If this discourages some borderline downvotes, OK. Downvotes aren't for when you think it might be wrong. They are for when you're reasonably sure something is wrong, and are prepared to defend your point.
Or maybe I just don't want to sit through some 10+ comments of voting drama whenever someone who can't deal with criticism gets down-voted. Or read it when I browse through answers.
~~It is not constructive to start some "who downvoted" tantrum and it will not likely change the vote situation for the better either. The only thing achieved is no doubt an effective drama generator.~~
It will no doubt distract from the actual content of the posts.
And it reeks of social media. "John likes this!" I don't care!
> It will lead to retribution wars.
> No, it won't.
Yes it will. I have had several stalkers harassing me on SE even with hidden voting. And then I mean actual, creepy stalkers, not just revenge-voters as happened here recently, I've had at least 10+ of those. Several such situations started with me explaining why I down/close voted something, so I can only see public votes making such occurrences far more frequent and severe.
> With everything out in the open, everyone, including the mods, can see who's acting like a child.
People who continuously and passionately demand to know who down-voted their imaginary internet points don't come across as particularly mature either.

> People will be afraid to say what they really mean.
> If you don't have enough conviction in your judgement that something is wrong, then it's not worth listening to in the first place. If this discourages some borderline downvotes, OK. Downvotes aren't for when you think it might be wrong. They are for when you're reasonably sure something is wrong, and are prepared to defend your point.
Or maybe I just don't want to sit through some 10+ comments of voting drama whenever someone who can't deal with criticism gets down-voted. Or read it when I browse through answers.
It is not constructive to start some "who downvoted" tantrum and it will not likely change the vote situation for the better either. The only thing achieved with public votes is no doubt an effective drama generator.
It will no doubt distract from the actual content of the posts.
And it reeks of social media. "John likes this!" I don't care!
> It will lead to retribution wars.
> No, it won't.
Yes it will. I have had several stalkers harassing me on SE even with hidden voting. And then I mean actual, creepy stalkers, not just revenge-voters as happened here recently, I've had at least 10+ of those. Several such situations started with me explaining why I down/close voted something, so I can only see public votes making such occurrences far more frequent and severe.
> With everything out in the open, everyone, including the mods, can see who's acting like a child.
People who continuously and passionately demand to know who down-voted their imaginary internet points don't come across as particularly mature either.

#1: Initial revision by

Lundin‭ · 2022-02-10T16:49:02Z (about 2 years ago)

Copy Link

Raw

Markdown

> People will be afraid to say what they really mean.
> If you don't have enough conviction in your judgement that something is wrong, then it's not worth listening to in the first place. If this discourages some borderline downvotes, OK. Downvotes aren't for when you think it might be wrong. They are for when you're reasonably sure something is wrong, and are prepared to defend your point.

Or maybe I just don't want to sit through some 10+ comments of voting drama whenever someone who can't deal with criticism gets down-voted. Or read it when I browse through answers. 

It is not constructive to start some "who downvoted" tantrum and it will not likely change the vote situation for the better either. The only thing achieved is no doubt an effective drama generator. 

It will no doubt distract from the actual content of the posts.

And it reeks of social media. "John likes this!" I don't care!

> It will lead to retribution wars.
> No, it won't. 

Yes it will. I have had several stalkers harassing me on SE even with hidden voting. And then I mean actual, creepy stalkers, not just revenge-voters as happened here recently, I've had at least 10+ of those. Several such situations started with me explaining why I down/close voted something, so I can only see public votes making such occurrences far more frequent and severe.

> With everything out in the open, everyone, including the mods, can see who's acting like a child. 

People who continuously and passionately demand to know who down-voted their imaginary internet points don't come across as particularly mature either.

Communities

Post History