I was wondering how users tend to judge what to upvote, what do downvote, and what not to vote on.
I made this comment which got me wondering what others think and do
Personally I upvote almost everything. I see upvote as “this is a good Lemmy post/comment” and downvote as “this is a bad Lemmy post/comment”. Most of what I see is good. Bad things are things such as misinformation, bad faith stuff / trolling, people being mean/annoying, bad (in my opinion) takes, people being wrong/stupid about stuff, irrelevant things, etc. When I do not vote it’s for one of 3 reasons: either I don’t understand what it is saying, it makes a reference I don’t get, or I can’t determine whether it’s good or bad (usually because it’s unclear).
I updoot basically everyone I interact with, or anyone I think has shared good insights, funny jokes or some other thing in that order. Or when relevant to a community like the unpopular opinion community where you upvote what you consider unpopular and downvote what you consider popular
I downvote when I think someone has a bad take, or is being hostile or spamming
And I don’t interact when im either feeling neutral on it, a good take is proposed in an asshole way, or someone whose comment is disagreeable enough for me not even consider engaging
This one is up there for me. Lack of tact. The worst is seeing a public spat where one party wasn’t totally closed off to having their view changed but then some clown takes a shit in the comment box and ruins that potential.
I upvote basically everyone and even those I’m arguing with on Lemmy. I rarely down vote, I use not voting as my functional down vote as people get pretty fucking creepy about tracking you when you vote them down.
Can one see who voted on a comment here? Or is that just when it’s likely by logical assumption (like a reply on a 3 months old comment getting downvoted after 2 minutes -> has to be from the person whose comment was replied to)