Great food for thought. I like some of your suggestions. I recently wrote a post suggesting the possible splitting off of flagging into it's own flagging power from voting power. I feel this is necessary to make flagging an activity that isn't self-punishing more than it needs to be.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Yes, the fear of retaliation even though doing something to improve quality. It is almost like a "whistleblower algorithm" so that the effect can be anonymised. This then creates a scenario of false-flags as a strategy.
It may be possible to include a bar showing green for the upvotes and red for flags. Users can read the article and make a decision whether the red is justified or not. At that point the relative green/red can become a poll on agree/disagree with a post rather than an issue of quality/plagiarism/spam etc.
Thanks for raising the issue. I don't have a solution I can immediately offer, so best to let the discussion progress.
I think you are probably on to something. I don't know that there is anyway to prevent retaliation without some form of anonymizing. That's got to be the most violated rule on Reddit: "The downvote is not a disagree button."