There shouldn't need to be any explanation. The value is higher than a downvoter thinks it should be. That's it. Of course not everyone uses it this way, and if that's the case they usually say something more. Usually.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
There should be, because not everything is about rewards.
Zakuu warned me that I was using a wrong tag that had nothing to do with my post and I removed the tag :) Otherwise it would have gotten downvoted and the post was around 0.2$ :)
And I have gotten downvoted on actifit post with 0.3 - 0.3$ because I told someone why they got a downvote from marky x)
Those go in my "other" category. Makes sense.
Posted using Partiko Android
I just think people could be nice and leave a reason why, instead of being cunts.
And so people could talk about stuff.
Generally when it’s for tag abuse the person is most likely spamming tags and quite frankly should know if their content falls into that category or not. I’ve seen many comments to explain the tag situation when that is the reason. And it sounds like you have gotten some communication in those times as well.
But generally I don’t see a reason to comment for disagreement of rewards, why should they? They sure aren’t normal if we have to explain each one. Do we need to explain each upvote as well?
Upvotes show you think the content is undervalued. Downvotes show you think the content is over rewarded. That could be just due to post rewards themselves or the idea that is over rewarded as its spam, plagiarism, harmful, or abuse of tags, bid bots etc.
I’m not one that thinks we need a comment each time.. but I understand how in the situation of improper tag use, it could just be a simple misunderstanding and a comment could help. I think each person just needs to use their best judgement on that one.
Once and it was just when tribes came out and I have always been limit to 5-8 tags since I mostly use apps for steem.
Well. It can still be confusing to why someone got a downvote.
I could downvote a blog post about god since I think thats harmful or a post with quotes from the bible I would see as plagiarism, no matter the reward x)
I dont do it since it also falls under the freedom of speech, but its just useless to me :)
There is nothing about a downvote that affects freedom of speech. Downvotes don’t remove content or censor it, they simply affect the amount of the inflation pool allocated to a post. So yeah if you think those posts are over rewarded, why not downvote them? It’s a valid reason imo.
This is what I mean about normalizing downvotes and seeing them for what they were intended.. and not how they have been used in the past.
Not sure I 100% agree :)
Someone can make an amazing post about god and get 20$ worth in upvote and their post is worth 20$ maybe even more because of the quality.
I just dont like the tropic, that shouldn't give them an downvote :)
I've used downvotes some few times in the past. I remember one article I found to be totally crap, this was in the "flame wars" between Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash. I believe the poster was just repeating rants he had heard from someone else, no good arguments, ad-hominems (argument going like "X is a bad person because he once did Y, X supports project Z, hence project Z must be totally crap"). I didn't only downvote it, but I also explained very well in the comments section why I had downvoted it. I didn't believe it was possible, but the author actually adjusted the article - and I removed my downvote.
(I sincerely believe the toxicity and schism in the bitcoin environment killed the chance Bitcoin had to compete with banking solutions - I wrote a bit about it in another post