Read further, I explain it further down. I guess you voted down, despite not reading if you even agree or not. Did I guess correct? If yes, do you see that as a problem, or is that completely okay?

Alright, you don’t want to talk about it. So please do stop. You repeating already answered questions doesn’t do anyone any good.

Sadly, we all are just human beings. I really hope that something emerges that tries to actually make things better for everyone, instead of creating even more division.

I’m sorry, but I think you are avoiding to talk about the merits of such a system based on the fact that you can’t dictate how users use a system. Your solution is to simply stop caring about it, my solution would be to encourage the correct usage of the system and educate everyone about it.

You argue for a good system, while at the same time you argue that no system can be good, because you can’t dictate anyone, and there are bots.

So… why even talk about this, if there is no reason for you that any of this makes sense?

How do you dictate how people use preference buttons?

Why do you want to dictate it?

They’re going to use them however they see fit, and that’s a good thing.

If that’s a good thing is the very thing we argue about right now. I disagree that this is a good thing. Especially if you mean that everybody should any system however they like, instead of how it is supposed to be used. If everyone uses any system differently, be it a 5 star system, or upvotes/downvotes, the system is not going to show what people think it shows, but a mix of all interpretations mangled into a number.

If half of the people use “3 stars” for an average product, but the other half uses “5 stars” for an average product, the rating is off for both halfs. It’s the same with rating the delivery. If the rating system is meant for the product only, using it for other reasons distorts the result of that system.

I hope you can see what I mean.

And how do you find good content without some sort of collective preference?

As I said elsewhere in this thread: By having a metric that shows how well written and thought through an argument is. You don’t have to “like” what is written or said, but you can acknowledge the quality of the argument.

what’s the best way to sort them so that users don’t have to read every comment?

Depends on what your goal is: Do you want users to read what they LIKE to read? Then you go for likes/dislikes, so what people want to read most is always at the top, creating a filter bubble, also called an echo chamber.

If you want to encourage quality discussion, where arguments are higher rated than emotional replies, then you should not do that.

That’s not at all what I’m talking about. I argue that using votes as “likes”, instead of how the Reddiquette originally meant it, is a bad idea for the very reason you are stating. Sorting by popularity is not going to highlight the best solution or argument, but the most popular one.

So you think that popularity equals quality?

to find something decent.

What does decent mean? Something popular? Or something with quality content and comments?

I agree. I don’t like the aspect that votes are seen as “lol internet points” by the devs and admins of Lemmy. I don’t even understand why it was implemented if they see it like that. If the votes are of no meaning, then… why take the time and implement a system for something that should be without any use?

The original “Reddiquette” was really well written in regards to voting. It was humane and about quality discussion. But… the new owners of Reddit, whoever it is, don’t care for quality discussion. If you want to sell data, you want votes and comments to be emotional gut reactions. So they actually are A/B testing to replace votes with literal “likes” and “dislikes”.

I think the “up” and “down” arrows suggest something that doesn’t easily align with the original Reddiquette. The upvote is not really the opposite of the downvote. It has different meanings, and should be two different buttons that do not look like opposites. That would help users to understand the Reddiquette. Also, that the final number is a simple “upvote-downvote” calculation contributes further to that problematic user interface communication.

It’s just imaginary internet points, relax.

Honest question: Then why are we having these points? If they are of no actual use, and nobody should care about them, why are they implemented? For what reason?

That’s a problematic workaround only possible with the “advanced view”.

I started to use Mastodon recently. I’m sorry if I sound grumpy, but… that’s a hell of an awful user interface. Basic features seem to be missing. I wanted to collect some topics I’m interested in… and you can’t do that. You have to type in the hashtag of your interest every single time. You can’t mix multiple hashtags for an overview. Simply put: You can’t follow hashtags. That’s a feature that is discussion since more than 5 years. I honestly don’t get it.