Perhaps it should be named “unconventional opinions that I still agree with”? Or perhaps “lol lets see what opinion they post now” (to be fair, the WHY ARE YOU BOOING ME? I’M RIGHT is sort of this)?
People are just upvoting and downvoting what they agree and disagree with, so it basically comes off as a trap to get things to laugh at - which it isn’t even good at. Should people not be voting on “yes, this is something that is genuinely unpopular”?
The voting guidelines are an attempt to encourage actual unpopular opinions to “rise to the top”, so to speak, as that is the purpose of the community. Obvious troll (or other rule-violating) posts should be reported rather than just downvoted, but we kind of expected people to embrace the spirit of the community. While many do, there are several problems with this approach:
- As others have stated, people just knee-jerk to the downvote button when they see something they disagree with
- 80% or more of the people on this platform don’t bother to read the rules for any community
- Muscle memory
- Edit: When a post from here shows up in /all for someone who isn’t familiar with the community, we can’t really expect them to click into it to look at the voting guidelines prior to voting.
We put out a poll a while back asking if the voting guidelines should be changed, but there was no majority in favor of it, so they remain the same.
Downvoted posts should move to the top
I think the real issue is the all feed. For many folks on Lemmy, there are no communities, there are only community tags on an otherwise never-ending stream of flotsam scrolling by on the all feed. This makes it very hard to establish community norms in any case.
Have posted a controversial opinion. Will report back with findings.
Posted political and got locked. Will try something lighter.
sorts “all” feed by controversial
Hmm, maybe we didn’t need a community for this in the first place?
One of the issues I’ve seen myself and have downvoted in this community is people just posting dumb shit. They don’t actually have that opinion and if they do, they haven’t given it any thought. Nothing wrong with having an unpopular opinion if they can actually defend their opinion. But just straight up posting something unreasonable under the guise of it being “unpopular” is downvote worthy.
I see the down voting more often as a method of saying “this is a troll” or “this opinion is unpopular because it is evil/ makes no sense”. I’ve seen plenty of unpopular opinions that have decent ratios while genuinely being unpopular.
I think it’s similar to how the right wing views the first amendment in the US. You can say whatever you want that’s unpopular. Noone is stopping you. But that doesn’t mean that you’re entitled to upvotes for being a bigot or troll just because it technically fits the subject of the sub.
I thought unpopular opinion meant: „I feel a bit alone with my opinion on xyz, is there someone who shares this opinion?“ I think it shouldn’t mean: „Here is my completely unhinged take on xyz that would get me banished from my community if I ever said it out loud“.
So imho it’s expected to stumble unpon people that agree with you.
It should be for „ I think socks in sandals are cute.“ and not „Hitler was a great guy and did nothing wrong.“
An opinion is a personal take on something. If your opinion isn’t popular, then the majority of other people disagree. I think you are talking more along the lines of ‘opinions I haven’t vocalised much, please validate it’.
I thought unpopular opinion meant: „I feel a bit alone with my opinion on xyz, is there someone who shares this opinion?“
That’s just “does anyone else . . . ?” type post. A classic unpopular opinion is like “milk in the bowl before cereal is superior”.
And the ones that get upvoted are like “that sounds so weotng but youre not hurting anyone so fair play” like the milk before cereal example.
That’s a better definition than mine.
Milk first is superior. What kind of psychopath want soggy cereal?
Just eat the cereal dry and drink a glass of milk then
That’s a nice take, but it feels like someone is heading to a trap to be on the stage for mockery - “WHY ARE YOU BOOING ME? IM RIGHT” . People who want that should find a community specifically related to supporting their beliefs, and usually can.
I think that people who post in Unpopular Opinions do so to get the sense “Ok, here is my opinion, but we can all respect each other even though I have it”. Also applies to your examples. Would someone who posted “sandals are cute” not get downvoted if the circlejerk against it wasn’t big enough?
If my take on what it should be is right, it’s also a litmus test for how accepting the community is - imagine a post "Hitler was a great guy and did nothing wrong.“ except all the comments just basically say “That’s unpopular, it is right to be unpopular, and you may be getting caught in bubbles of propaganda that don’t allow you to see it because of reasons xyz”. You get to correctly identify a Hitler supported, you correctly identify just about the most unpopular opinion you can have, and you also have direct communication to tell off the guy. I suppose that also makes this community a litmus test on Lemmy and how the community is like.
I think a big part of it is if the opinions main characteristic is that it’s unpopular. Yes, “hitler good” is an unpopular opinion, but much more so than that it’s a heinous horrifically ignorant opinion. So it gets downvoted for being an evil opinion, even though technically it is also unpopular.
An opinion like “milk in the bowl before cereal is better” is more in line. Is it evil? No, it’s just unpopular most people wouldn’t agree but if you genuinely prefer milk before cereal in the bowl you’re not hurting anybody. So the defining characteristic of that opinion is that it’s unpopular and not some other “worse” characteristic.
This is we’re I disagree. There’s absolutely no reason interact at all with someone who says stuff like this. Either they are a troll and shouldn’t be „fed“ or they are serious and should be blocked. There is no reasoning with fascists. There should be things people don’t dare to say because some things are not only morally, but ethically unbearable. And „Hitler was right“ is one of those things.
Look up Daryl Davis, to put one example.
Thanks for reminding me of his name (his story I remembered)
Sorry, I wasn’t precise: I don’t interact with people beyond a certain level of „unhingedness“ in social media. Face to face on the other hand I think it’s important to speak up (if you don’t put yourself in harms way). But even in real life there’s a point where I end the communication: When I get the feeling, the other person is only using me as a jump pad to push his talking points on bystanders or is not interested in actually listening to each other.
A Wiglaf Droste said something about this over thirty years ago and I like his statement, because he takes Nazis seriously and thinks they are capable of making their own decisions and should live with the consequences of those decisions:
Everyone is seeking dialogue with right-wing extremists. Why? Do they have anything to say? Isn’t it already well known what they think, demand, and propagate? […] Do we have to sniff every trash can? No one votes for Nazis or becomes one because they are mistaken about their goals—the opposite is true: Nazis are Nazis because they want to be. One of the most unpleasant German traits—that dripping self-pity and pity for one’s own countrymen—turns such evolutionary aberrations into poor, misguided souls, essentially good but just a bit unstable, etc., “people,” in any case, according to Heinz Eggert [german politician from the 90‘s], “for whom we must fight.”
Why? I am completely indifferent to the fate of Nazis; whether they go hungry, freeze, wet the bed, have bad dreams, etc., is none of my business. There is only one thing that interests me about them: that they be prevented from doing what they do when left unchecked—threatening and, if possible, killing those who do not fit into their cigar-box world. Whether they are locked up for it or have to be laid on the autopsy table is all the same to me, and anyone who dreams of the camp (for others) is welcome to go there themselves.
People don’t check the channel when it’s in their timeline. They treat it like a regular post and they vote on it like they always do.
This requires some redesign of the way the channel is treated to make it work.
Exactly.
It’s the same for other communities also.
Have e.g. seen a lot of unexpected downvotes for legit dull posts on Dull Men’s Club.Would perhaps help if the community name would be displayed more prominently.
On the other hand, the community names sometimes don’t mirror the description or content of the community.
So it’s complicated…Perhaps count votes from actual community members seperatly from the rest?
I’ve not seen someone use such wrong words to describe part of the website they’re on before. “channel” and “timeline”? What?
Good point, maybe better design could help address it.
Default sort with most down votes at the top, and let people down vote.
[Unpop] Just require post tags.
This is an extremely popular opinion.
I agree, hence I’ve downvoted.
If you believe it is, totally legit according to the pretext, you guys did your part.
I’m doing my part.
Heres my opinion: Votes doesn’t matter, it merely inhibits conversation when we can express your reaction to a post with a click of a button instead of explaining our own thoughts on the matter.
Just post what you want to post and try to avoid looking at the number, or go over to an app or instance that doesn’t show votes, or allows you to select your own settings for votes, or only shows upvotes.
Yet you haven’t posted even once. Are you so sure your experience, worries, and interest as the same as a person considering to post? My take on the people who post the most on Lemmy is pretty close to what it is in Reddit.
No, I pretty clearly stated it was my opinion, not everyone elses.
People who post aren’t a monolith either, but have a wide range of experiences and worries. Do you even know if this is my only account?
The only unpopular opinions I have seen downvoted to hell (recently at least) have been objective facts that were incorrect. Saying your opinion is [thing that is untrue] should still go into a black hole.
Sounds like you are just twisting the definition of opinion to justify this behavior. Objectively, it is independent of actual objective fact, it is by it’s very nature the complete opposite, subjective. A child can have the opinion that Santa Claus exists a Christian can have the opinion that god exists, an investor can have an opinion of future events that cannot possibly be related to objective truth yet. Words can have multiple meanings, but even ignoring the ones that agree with me, I can’t find any that agree with yours except yours.
If that’s what you are doing, then I have more respect for the people who go “lol lets see what opinion they post now”, if only because one has more a shared reality to it.
Your argument only apply to downvotes - I’m curious, any opinion about the upvotes of unconventional but otherwise popular opinions?
The existence of God or how future events play out is unprovable, so you can have an opinion on it. But if you try to tell me „cat“ is the French word for fish it’s not unpopular, it’s just wrong.
People vote on what should gain more visibility, or less. So if your point is well created and somewhat heinous in nature, people down vote as to keep your opinion from spreading. If your opinion is true even if unpopular, I wager it will gain visibility. Even divisive opinions will gain visibility due to discussion.
- Vote the opposite of the norm.
If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it’s something that’s widely accepted, give it an arrow 🩹
You are describing something else.
Upvotes/downvotes dont matter on this site. Its not like reddit where downvotes limit how much you can comment and upvotes are required to participate in communities.
Its dumb that people cant upvote opinoins they disagree with but it is what it is. Maybe the OP should post a comment saying Agree and a comment saying disagree so only the people who bothered to open the thread can vote.
They still effect visibility under most post sorting options, lower scored things display lower. Matters in a minor way for scrolling through the subscribed feed.
Lemmy is different from Reddit. On Reddit you get pushed content to keep you busy. On Lemmy you just get the most active and new content. So I’m guessing a lot of people just get these posts in their feed without even being subscribed to this community.
I upvoted this not because you are correct but because you care about votes. Least popular thing I can think of. Nice job.
Funny thing, there seems to have been a multimillion industry built on caring about upvotes on the platforms people tell me it doesn’t matter. I agree with you, but largely because of the temporal irrelevance of Lemmy at the moment. There are plenty of accounts who have months in between comments and yet upvote or downvote regularly, so I can only assume it matters to them. Thank you, I try not to fall into the rot of popularisms.
It can get mixed up. People can upvote their agreement with the sentiment that it’s unpopular or the agreement with the opinion itself. It makes the arrow system unreliable because you can’t be sure they see it as choosing between agreeing with the opinion and agreeing with its unpopularity.
