What sort of post or comment gets you downvoted the most? Especially if you don’t think it’s bad behavior in the first place, or don’t care. Does not have to be on Lemmy, but we are here…
One of the good things about Lemmy IMO is that it’s small enough to see the posts that are unpopular. If you do “Top Day” on most channels, you cash reach the bottom, see what people here don’t like.
As far as comments, attempting to rebut the person who is telling me my post sucks, is what gets me into negative numbers most often. The OP is going to voite it down, of course, and nobody else cares, usually.
You must log in or register to comment.
I’m going to lock this one as it’s causing too much conflict.
I want people to represent themselves really well, through their writing. I forget to consider their feels.
Most recently? Pointing out that the Soviet Union were serious contenders in the space race.
Any comment in regards to better personal budgeting gets down votes and the typical “avocado toast” response.
Read my comment history
No one seems to know or care that “begging the question” means using circular logic and not that something has led to an event where people are begging to ask a question.
An example of properly begging the question could be, “does your mom know you’re gay?” It’s a yes or no question, but you can’t answer it properly if you are straight. That’s begging the question.
Whenever I point this out, I get down voted, which leads to the question: why y’all prefer being wrong?
Just talk about how you genuinely enjoy Microsoft Windows as an operating system.
What sort of post or comment gets you downvoted the most?
Anything that contradicts the hateful propaganda of the American ruling class. Or if you write something progressive and anti-imperialist. For example, If you say that modern Ukraine is a corrupted right wing state, you get downvoted immediately. Or if you don’t share their hatred of Russia, China, Communism and anything that is somehow different from their racist AmeriKKKan empire. Even from the anticommunist comments here, it’s clear. Lemmyworld have a huge nazi problem.
Lately, basically saying that hamas did a big mistake and Gaza would be in a better situation now if they (hamas) were smarter human beings.
Easy one. Communism is the future of mankind, prove me wrong
You’d go straight to the top of several communities
why does it seem like basically all the past communist leaders were also evil and cruel? can’t we get some chill ones?
Because anyone trying anything remotely close to communism becomes a big target for bourgeouisie capitalist interests. But hey, it is much better to be a chill communist who gets strung up in the streets by fascists while accomplishing nothing, am I right?
Posting pro-continuation of human existence when everybody else celebrating human extinction.
When tankies are on about nuking the west or genociding “white libruls” they tend to dogpile you for calling them fascist pigfuckers.
Can’t tell if they like the attention or not because they always share a pic of a pig shitting on its own balls.
Is it an initiation right? a call to arms? is it a sexual advance?! We may never know.
When tankies are on about nuking the west or genociding “white libruls”
Complete self projecting. Libs like you hate China, Russian, Syria, Palestine, Cuba, and just about any country that oppose your genocidal masters in Washington. So the real fascist pigfucker is in your mirror, bro.
It’s like a secret handshake; If you accept and fuck the pig, they know you’re one of them.
Anytime I mention something vaguely positive about religion. I’m a former religious studies scholar who studied comparative religions. I have two degrees in the subject. I don’t think I’m saying anything controversial: the main thing I usually write is that you cannot usually say that a religion is a monolith - they are pretty complex phenomenon with many variations within them. You can say that Salafis are the totality of Islam. You can’t say that evangelicals are the totality of Christianity. You can’t say 969 in Burma is the totality of Buddhism. You can’t say Hindutva is Hinduism. You can’t say that the Settlers on the West Bank are the totality of Judaism. Religions without any variation or complexity usually die after a generation or two. I don’t just have these arguments online, I am used to have them with students and with friends. But nuance has few safe harbors on the internet…
Wrong politics. Too dry of satire. Too absurd of memes. Pictures of Charles III.
I can’t imagine going out of your way to downvote people like that. I don’t have an interest in cigars so I just ignore those communities. If I went around downvoting post in communities I have a problem with, I’d be doing that all day.
Right? If you don’t like the subject matter, just block the community. No point in pissing on every post in a very small, niche, mostly harmless community.
Should see my blocked communities list. Granted 80% is extremely niche porn or non-English speaking, it’s still very easy to not care and tap three dots, tap Block Community. A really big part of Reddit actually being good was curating the feed and Lemmy is no different. Why wouldn’t someone want to see only stuff they care about when going on Lemmy? Way more effort to downvote lol
Either nuance in a topic people are very black and white about or not being able to figure out how people can read things as the opposite of what I wrote.
Only happened a couple of times, no regrets.
Oh, hell yeah.
Anything political or anywhere connected to something that could be culturally attached for some people. Especially when people start comparing one evil to another and try to say one’s worse because we’re used to doing the other and accept it as normal, so we should completely ignore how it’s barbaric as fuck and just address the one topic that’s more politically or culturally unacceptable or convenient to support.
Hey, how about we acknowledge that they’re both bad, and they can both be equally bad and work on correcting the one culturally accepted one while it’s politically convenient to address the one that we can agree is evil*, too.
Heh, I get down votes from both sides a fair bit. In one part I am supportive of views, but raise obvious issues in other areas. This makes the For team upset. The Against team hates me too because my stance is on the For team’s side. The result is an inbox full of fine examples of how in-fighting destroys the grass while the other side of the fence has no idea they’re apathetically winning.
Almost all of this comes down to people attempting to express their self-assessed virtuosity as superior to others, or they are driven by a manipulative fallacy—argumentun ad populum is a big one in echo chambers—causing them to easily sway closer to extremes with little critical thought first.
This is why we are supposed to discuss and not argue, remaining constantly open to exploring and contemplating new information. It is not about who is right or wrong, rather the discourse and learning from it. But that’s not the default setting in many Lemmy communities.
Yep, I still make the misstake from time to yime and try and give a resonable take on a rant post when I feel like they are too unfair.
Latst time was a few days ago when I responed to a person in a Linux community ranting about how Windows 11 sucks because he didn’t know how to use it properly and that it had the audacity to not include drivers for 20 year old equipment.
I got massively downvoted and after I explained that I was an IT tech that didn’t run Linux on my main machine, I was weirdly called out and some idiot claimed that you can’t be an IT tech if you are not running Linux as your main computer OS.
It was kinda funny, I was bashed contiously by the open community for a minor disagreement, while I believe that I stayed polite throughout the conversation
You can be an IT technician with Windows on your main machine. Whether you should be is a different question.
If my needs were better served by Linux on my main machine, then yeah, I’d go Linux, but since Windows better suit my needs at the moment I don’t.
I did run Linux as my main OS for about two years, but then my needs changed and I went back to Windows.
Linux users drive me crazy. They clearly see that Windows users try to use Linux like it’s Windows and encounter problems. Why can’t they see that trying to use Windows like it’s Linux will have the same issues?
That first one is where I feel I’ve seen myself and others get downvoted more than anything else listed here. Maybe it is recency bias from that one thread the other day lol.
Honestly though in all actuality there are very few topics where nuance does exist like with guns for example: it’s a very nuanced issue and calls for bans without acknowledging the reality that for many in America relying on the justice and police systems is not always a good or even safe option when it comes to personal safety, but at the end of the day you either ban them or you don’t and any extra asterisks are minutiae, so people don’t really care about your personal reasons they just want to know what side you fall on in the conflict.
So often nuance-enjoyers come off as effectively saying “what if we rape but only sometimes?” on the topic of whether rape should be a crime in society.
Every topic has nuance.
Every. Single. Topic.
There is even nuance when talking about nazis. Like the fact that they rose to power by giving people economic solutions prior to speed running pure evil. That doesn’t anything that they did was good, because the nuance is in how they implemented those economic actions. The small details that made it work so they could rise to power at that point point time in that location.
Nuance doesn’t mean good or evil, just complexity and more details than most people think about. Sometimes it isn’t super relevant, and can be used to distract from the high level details, but it is still there. Nuance with racial disparity is keeping in mind that a lot of racism is implemented in different ways regionally, while still being racism.
So often nuance-enjoyers come off as effectively saying “what if we rape but only sometimes?” on the topic of whether rape should be a crime in society.
That isn’t nuance. That is weaponized compromise.
The fiddly details about consent and coercion in relation to rape would be about nuance.
Asking people to see nuance here and the rest of the web is the worst. You’re either left or right. Urban or not. Up or down. There is no in between, partial solutions are useless. Drives me bonkers
What a constrictive outlook on human dynamic and expression.
What’s interesting is that the language allows multiple meanings. The commenter above can either be driven bonkers by presence of nuance or the lack of it and both interpretations are correct.
The first sentence can be seen as being against nuance or it can be seen as being against the online experience of asking for nuance.
The next sentences can be seen as arguments against nuance or examples of behaviour encountered when asking for it.
And the final bonkers can either be against the use of nuance or the repeated responses to it use.So without further clarification, we can’t really be sure which stance the commenter implies.
With only these two situations presented, it’s a 50/50, left or right choice, so I’ll go ahead and presume it’s the latter, since that seems to be more likely encountered in online chats.If the commenter meant that a black/white mindset drives them nuts, then I redirect my comment, in the sense that:
- I agree, it’s nuts.
- My comment applies to people with that mindset.
I reckon it’s the issue of pseudo-anonymity combined with the lack of tone in a text post. If you’re talking IRL it’s much clearer that you’re making a joke or whatever, but all that gets lost in text. Also you generally know who you’re talking to IRL, whereas online you don’t know if that comment was written by a professor of ethics or a teenager who watched a single video on the topic and is parroting opinions they are now convinced are correct.
If you call both sides right/wrong when both sides are right/wrong, both sides downvote you.
Mention a third option, middle ground, or reasonable compromise is a downvoting.
Tell them to chill, you might have well stuck a hornets nest up you ass. There’s a reason you occasionally see people just admitting they were wrong or changing their mind get sent to the front page, its just rare.
The older I get the less patience I have for actual morons. if someone wants to put words in my mouth I don’t have to be there for it. I just block and move on.
