• Stoneykins
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Simple. If the post is old and has no upvotes, I assume everyone else thought it was bad.

    But really, on a post by post basis, I make up my own mind? Do you not? Like, do you decide whether or not you like a post based on the votes it has? Because I just, like it or dont like it.

    • DMmeYourNudes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’re a moderator, not a publisher. You don’t decide what is or is not good content, you decide what is or is not against the rules. If “bad content is not allowed” is a rule, witch it virtually is if you remove posts because no one upvotes them, then why would anyone post to a community that forces you to appease the mods before anyone else has seen your post. The downvotes mean the mods need to do less work and the community can self moderate good posts and good content with the push of a button. How you do not understand that pushing down bad content is fundamental to link aggregation and combating community vote manipulation after all the shit that happened in Reddit, even through the downvotes, is beyond me.

      • Stoneykins
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is silly. I just disagree with I think all of it. Spam is bad and should be against the rules. Part of what made me personally so ready to leave reddit was the toxicity, and the favorite toy of the toxic redditor is the downvote.

        • DMmeYourNudes@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          this isn’t about what you agree with, your only counter to a situation where bad content can reach more people because no one can push it down is that it would never get upvoted in the first place, witch isn’t the issue with not having downvotes.