[Meta] Regarding The Removal Of Downvotes
[Meta] Regarding The Removal Of Downvotes
This instance (lemmynsfw.com) has removed downvotes. I have shown my negative attitude to downvotes in this reply (NSFW) to a [M] post. I hope and think that I didn't have significant impact on this decision.
I want to use this post as a reminder that this community is not focused on one specific gender or one specific sexuality. This community is intended for any pre 2000 NFSW, porn or erotic content (as long as it doesn't break the instance rules of course). I really hope Lemmy introduces a tag/flair feature in the future so people have an easier time filtering out posts that don't fit their preference.
I encourage everyone to report posts that break instance or community rules. I also encourage everyone to reply with contructive criticism to posts that they don't like, if possible.
Edit: clarification, I meant negative attitude to downvotes
You're viewing a single thread.
I'm famous! (Your link goes to my reply to your comment instead of the parent comment for me)
Hmmm, that's weird. I did actually copy the link of my comment.
Downvoting is a legitimate feature of any posting site, especially if something doesn’t fit the theme or spirit of a category and is just posting for coverage, like advertising for onlyfans by sending the same pic to multiple threads. I guess ‘report post’ is going to become more toxic as a consequence.
In this case, downvotes are discouraging.
The non-nude photos posted in my /c/boots are consistently downvoted because they don't appeal to a wide audience on this instance, who are only interested in seeing tits, pussy and ass.
And there isn't enough content on this instance to where just viewing the content from your subscriptions is a satisfying experience.
I understand your general concerns but thankfully for this community the onlyfans example doesn't really apply.
I also would have preferred a solution where it's up to the individual communities to disable or enable downvotes.
I’m glad to see downvotes are back, because the scenario I described happens more often than you realise;
