Dislikes is a way of expressing your opinion. When you post something on the internet you have to accept peoples may not agree/like it, either internet is not for you. Critics are also a good way to improve yourself.
This site became infinitely better when we removed the downbear. I was against it at the time, but I can’t argue with the results.
Just the fact that choosing not to interact is a sign of displeasure means that people who post dumb shit still feel the sting, but they don’t get the sensation of engagement, making them less likely to post thru it.
These are competing social media services that people use primarily for fun. People want to enjoy their time in these spaces and if they don’t enjoy it they go somewhere else.
Anyway the downvotes don’t help people to “improve yourself”. They encourage worse behaviour. Recipients of downvotes do not adjust their behaviour positively they go into a spiral of behaving in even more ways that produce even more downvotes.
Look here:
“We find that negative feedback leads to significant behavioural changes that are detrimental to the community,” say Cheng and co.
“Not only do authors of negatively-evaluated content contribute more, but also their future posts are of lower quality, and are perceived by the community as such,” they say. And it gets worse: “These authors are more likely to subsequently evaluate their fellow users negatively, percolating these effects through the community.”
When you post something on the internet you have to accept peoples may not agree/like it, either internet is not for you
This is not true at all, most internet platforms are designed to connect you with like minded people and severely reduce likelihood of disagreement.
Critics are also a good way to improve yourself.
No they aren’t if they are just random strangers whose input you did not ask for or know whether to value, and the criticism only comes in the form of wordless downvotes. I mean name one time you have personally improved yourself because your comment got mass downvoted.
There’s many peoples that use dislikes to know if they will like a video or not. Every opinion systems has their evil side and restricting it dosn’t improve content quality on a platform, or even “reduce harassment” like they said.
There are not many people that this actually describes, unless it’s for instructional videos, which already get recommended and boosted for quality by the algorithm based on view count and average seconds watched. Unless you have solid numbers, “There’s many peoples” is not a reliable enough fact to operate based on.
Everything other than instructional videos is watched by: people who have a preexisting interest in a video searching for/clicking on it already certain they will like it, a content creator’s existing subscriber community, or a person seeing the video shared by someone they know–usually embedded outside of YouTube. In zero of these cases will the person watching the video get to see the like/dislike bar before starting to watch the video, and in nearly zero of these cases will seeing the dislike bar alone dissuade someone from watching the rest of a video. Reading the comment section might dissuade them, but that still exists.
Overall the dislike bar serves brigading, botting, and protest voting campaigns more accurately and frequently than it serves as an indicator of quality for the majority of types of YouTube videos. After all, what meaningful difference in action would a 12% down voted video have on you vs a 20% down voted one? Most bars are still majority green so quality is not readily discernable, and the majority of the heavily red video bars of non-instructional videos are caused by brigading and targeted harassment and therefore also not reflective of quality.
And restricting dislikes actually does reduce harassment, as tested extensively by researchers with a financial interest in understanding the truth and increasing the positive experience of its users. Your arguments however are from the realm of wishful thinking and conjecture.
But we are getting away from your original arguments: dislikes for YouTube videos produced with effort are still more valid than dislike counters on every tweeted out off-hand thought as proposed by Elon, dislike tallies are not useful criticism of anything without accompanying written feedback, dislike tallies have not directly helped you or anyone else to improve themselves, but every platform user being made to think twice about how many dislikes each post of their could receive could cause unnecessary self-censorship. Lastly, the internet is for everyone, including those who want to create and post all day but also avoid seeing a visual counter of dislikes on everything they put out there.
Dislikes is a way of expressing your opinion. When you post something on the internet you have to accept peoples may not agree/like it, either internet is not for you. Critics are also a good way to improve yourself.
This site became infinitely better when we removed the downbear. I was against it at the time, but I can’t argue with the results.
Just the fact that choosing not to interact is a sign of displeasure means that people who post dumb shit still feel the sting, but they don’t get the sensation of engagement, making them less likely to post thru it.
How is reducing engagement a good thing for a community ?
Because “engagement” is the GDP of websites.
It’s not a reduction of any engagement, it’s a reduction in negative engagement.
What awoo said
These are competing social media services that people use primarily for fun. People want to enjoy their time in these spaces and if they don’t enjoy it they go somewhere else.
Anyway the downvotes don’t help people to “improve yourself”. They encourage worse behaviour. Recipients of downvotes do not adjust their behaviour positively they go into a spiral of behaving in even more ways that produce even more downvotes.
Look here:
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1405.1429
This is not true at all, most internet platforms are designed to connect you with like minded people and severely reduce likelihood of disagreement.
No they aren’t if they are just random strangers whose input you did not ask for or know whether to value, and the criticism only comes in the form of wordless downvotes. I mean name one time you have personally improved yourself because your comment got mass downvoted.
More and more people are saying it folks
There’s many peoples that use dislikes to know if they will like a video or not. Every opinion systems has their evil side and restricting it dosn’t improve content quality on a platform, or even “reduce harassment” like they said.
There are not many people that this actually describes, unless it’s for instructional videos, which already get recommended and boosted for quality by the algorithm based on view count and average seconds watched. Unless you have solid numbers, “There’s many peoples” is not a reliable enough fact to operate based on.
Everything other than instructional videos is watched by: people who have a preexisting interest in a video searching for/clicking on it already certain they will like it, a content creator’s existing subscriber community, or a person seeing the video shared by someone they know–usually embedded outside of YouTube. In zero of these cases will the person watching the video get to see the like/dislike bar before starting to watch the video, and in nearly zero of these cases will seeing the dislike bar alone dissuade someone from watching the rest of a video. Reading the comment section might dissuade them, but that still exists.
Overall the dislike bar serves brigading, botting, and protest voting campaigns more accurately and frequently than it serves as an indicator of quality for the majority of types of YouTube videos. After all, what meaningful difference in action would a 12% down voted video have on you vs a 20% down voted one? Most bars are still majority green so quality is not readily discernable, and the majority of the heavily red video bars of non-instructional videos are caused by brigading and targeted harassment and therefore also not reflective of quality.
And restricting dislikes actually does reduce harassment, as tested extensively by researchers with a financial interest in understanding the truth and increasing the positive experience of its users. Your arguments however are from the realm of wishful thinking and conjecture.
But we are getting away from your original arguments: dislikes for YouTube videos produced with effort are still more valid than dislike counters on every tweeted out off-hand thought as proposed by Elon, dislike tallies are not useful criticism of anything without accompanying written feedback, dislike tallies have not directly helped you or anyone else to improve themselves, but every platform user being made to think twice about how many dislikes each post of their could receive could cause unnecessary self-censorship. Lastly, the internet is for everyone, including those who want to create and post all day but also avoid seeing a visual counter of dislikes on everything they put out there.