Enforced toxic positivity does not produce better conversations or better communities. It basically just turns a discussion forum into Disneyland, where everyone is happy all the time, because there’s no other option. It’s the kind of yes-man thinking you get in corporate meetings that produce really bad ideas because “don’t be negative! there are no bad ideas here!”
The only Lemmy community I’m aware of that has actually removed downvotes is hexbear - because they were tired of having their pro-Maoist rhetoric downvoted to oblivion by sane people. Hexbear is not a healthy place.
I wouldn’t imply that the unhealthyness of hexbear is due to the disabled downvoting though, and I’m sure you aren’t either, but just to be clear.
No, I’m implying the reverse: disabling downvoting is a symptom of the unhealthy mentality of the people running that server. Disabling downvoting appeals to authoritarians - that is, the type of people who are interested in silencing dissent (QED).
You are the one implying that it’s enforced toxic positivity. It’s not.
I’m disagreeing with you perfectly fine, and I can block/report toxic people too.
While I agree with you that the concept of forced toxic positivity is bad, I don’t see the implication that blocking downvotes is it.
You downvote either when you disagree with a comment, which is a soft censorship and I don’t really like that, or when the other user is being an asshole, in which case the proper tool is the block/report, not downvoting.
If you disagree with a comment you can either respond or ignore, I feel like downvoting is a soft censorship that creates an unnecessary bias on new readers.
In any case, feel free to have your opinion that blocking downvotes sucks, but please don’t say that it’s forcing toxic positivity, that’s not true.
I don’t have much experience with that community, but from the little I’ve seen, agreed. It’s not good.
A good forum design will only get you so far, the rest is up to the moderators. If you let bad actors in, it doesn’t matter how you designed your forum, they will poison the well and drive other people out.
The best communities I’ve been in are in independent old-style forums. One of them is Tildes. Most of these don’t feature downvotes (or upvotes for that matter) and are honestly the better places to have discussions IMO.
Enforced toxic positivity does not produce better conversations or better communities. It basically just turns a discussion forum into Disneyland, where everyone is happy all the time, because there’s no other option. It’s the kind of yes-man thinking you get in corporate meetings that produce really bad ideas because “don’t be negative! there are no bad ideas here!”
In my experience, that’s not what happens
The only Lemmy community I’m aware of that has actually removed downvotes is hexbear - because they were tired of having their pro-Maoist rhetoric downvoted to oblivion by sane people. Hexbear is not a healthy place.
Blahaj has then disabled too, and I’m sure there’s more.
I actually engage in more disagreements now because I don’t have the easy down button. I’m pretty anti downvote now tbh.
I wouldn’t imply that the unhealthyness of hexbear is due to the disabled downvoting though, and I’m sure you aren’t either, but just to be clear.
No, I’m implying the reverse: disabling downvoting is a symptom of the unhealthy mentality of the people running that server. Disabling downvoting appeals to authoritarians - that is, the type of people who are interested in silencing dissent (QED).
Oh, so you are actually implying that blahaj has an unhealthy mentality too since we don’t have downvoting?
Bruh. I was trying to give you an out, nvm.
Enforced toxic positivity is unhealthy, yes.
It’s not the cause, it’s a symptom of a larger problem.
What would I need an “out” for?
You are the one implying that it’s enforced toxic positivity. It’s not.
I’m disagreeing with you perfectly fine, and I can block/report toxic people too.
While I agree with you that the concept of forced toxic positivity is bad, I don’t see the implication that blocking downvotes is it.
You downvote either when you disagree with a comment, which is a soft censorship and I don’t really like that, or when the other user is being an asshole, in which case the proper tool is the block/report, not downvoting.
If you disagree with a comment you can either respond or ignore, I feel like downvoting is a soft censorship that creates an unnecessary bias on new readers.
In any case, feel free to have your opinion that blocking downvotes sucks, but please don’t say that it’s forcing toxic positivity, that’s not true.
I don’t have much experience with that community, but from the little I’ve seen, agreed. It’s not good.
A good forum design will only get you so far, the rest is up to the moderators. If you let bad actors in, it doesn’t matter how you designed your forum, they will poison the well and drive other people out.
The best communities I’ve been in are in independent old-style forums. One of them is Tildes. Most of these don’t feature downvotes (or upvotes for that matter) and are honestly the better places to have discussions IMO.