But downvoting doesn’t mean that. At all. Not even sure how you got that idea. It’s also not hiding your comments, it’s sorting them. And the reader get’s to select the sort order (some which entirely ignore votes).
You’re definitely projecting your own opinion of the matter here. You’re not debating anything by simply repeatedly denying their view and restating your opinion.
Now please, if you want to actually discuss it, respond to their points about how many sorting schemes do not factor in votes. Respond to anything except the parts you simply want to deny.
You’re clearly getting engagement despite being downvoted, so this very discussion is proving your opinion ignorant and rather dogmatic.
I’m getting downvotes because people don’t like being told they’re behaving obnoxiously. That’s all. I didn’t downvote you or anyone else. I respect all of your opinions.
No, you’re getting downvoted because you’re only responding to the parts of posts that you want to completely deny instead of engaging with other details.
Now, either continue to prove my point that you’re either bad faith or immature to the point of lacking self awareness, or respond to the other points made like how several ways to sort don’t even factor in votes like the default “active” or new comments, etc, or how some people actively seek out the controversial posts.
Yes yes, I take the point about the sorting-algo choices and karma absence and so on. I acknowledged it in another comment.
My fundamental point (which you are ignoring) concerns the motivations and incentives for downvoting. My contention is that downvoting thoughtful and well-expressed opinions is always (always) toxic and unhealthy. Others don’t see it that way. So be it.
Nah, I wasn’t ignoring your fundamental points. I was discussing a tangent related to why you were being downvoted specifically. I find keeping to one topic at a time greatly increases someone’s chance of actually reading and understanding it.
I agree in the general case that up/down votes are far too coarse and uninformative, but sometimes it’s pretty obvious why someone’s getting an upset of votes.
Well, for my troubles I went back thru the thread to try to understand what it is exactly that’s bothering you. Seems maybe it’s a misunderstanding about my response to remon (“You’re not debating anything by simply repeatedly denying their view and restating” - you). That particular comment was not intended to argue anything, it was my mockery of remon’s condescending shtick (“But downvoting doesn’t mean that. At all. Not even sure how you got that idea.” etc - perhaps read it aloud to hear the drippingly patronizing tone, as if to a child who couldn’t possibly have a different idea of what exactly downvoting means - a question which is, after all, is a bit of a philosophical conundrum). That triggered me into disrespectful sarcasm - which, if you look, you will find I almost never do, I’m generally very civil.
I did get their substantive points (about algorithms, tweakable knobs etc, I know all the arguments by heart) but fundamentally I still believe that a blanket downvote button is analogous to slapping someone down or confiscating their mic - which are things people don’t do in person, they’re simply too rude (or coarse, as you put it). In person we have manners. I wish we did virtually too.
But downvoting doesn’t mean that. At all. Not even sure how you got that idea. It’s also not hiding your comments, it’s sorting them. And the reader get’s to select the sort order (some which entirely ignore votes).
So yeah, you’re not making any sense here.
It doesn’t?
Really? At all?
Hmm. You mean you don’t have perfect insight into other people’s minds? Admittedly that’s odd.
And you’re coming across as the kind of sanctimonious interlocutor that I can’t be bothered to answer properly.
You’re definitely projecting your own opinion of the matter here. You’re not debating anything by simply repeatedly denying their view and restating your opinion.
Now please, if you want to actually discuss it, respond to their points about how many sorting schemes do not factor in votes. Respond to anything except the parts you simply want to deny.
You’re clearly getting engagement despite being downvoted, so this very discussion is proving your opinion ignorant and rather dogmatic.
I’m getting downvotes because people don’t like being told they’re behaving obnoxiously. That’s all. I didn’t downvote you or anyone else. I respect all of your opinions.
No, you’re getting downvoted because you’re only responding to the parts of posts that you want to completely deny instead of engaging with other details.
Now, either continue to prove my point that you’re either bad faith or immature to the point of lacking self awareness, or respond to the other points made like how several ways to sort don’t even factor in votes like the default “active” or new comments, etc, or how some people actively seek out the controversial posts.
Yes yes, I take the point about the sorting-algo choices and karma absence and so on. I acknowledged it in another comment.
My fundamental point (which you are ignoring) concerns the motivations and incentives for downvoting. My contention is that downvoting thoughtful and well-expressed opinions is always (always) toxic and unhealthy. Others don’t see it that way. So be it.
Nah, I wasn’t ignoring your fundamental points. I was discussing a tangent related to why you were being downvoted specifically. I find keeping to one topic at a time greatly increases someone’s chance of actually reading and understanding it.
I agree in the general case that up/down votes are far too coarse and uninformative, but sometimes it’s pretty obvious why someone’s getting an upset of votes.
Well, for my troubles I went back thru the thread to try to understand what it is exactly that’s bothering you. Seems maybe it’s a misunderstanding about my response to remon (“You’re not debating anything by simply repeatedly denying their view and restating” - you). That particular comment was not intended to argue anything, it was my mockery of remon’s condescending shtick (“But downvoting doesn’t mean that. At all. Not even sure how you got that idea.” etc - perhaps read it aloud to hear the drippingly patronizing tone, as if to a child who couldn’t possibly have a different idea of what exactly downvoting means - a question which is, after all, is a bit of a philosophical conundrum). That triggered me into disrespectful sarcasm - which, if you look, you will find I almost never do, I’m generally very civil.
I did get their substantive points (about algorithms, tweakable knobs etc, I know all the arguments by heart) but fundamentally I still believe that a blanket downvote button is analogous to slapping someone down or confiscating their mic - which are things people don’t do in person, they’re simply too rude (or coarse, as you put it). In person we have manners. I wish we did virtually too.
Yeah. Sometimes I can’t resist. Sorry.