Upvotes seem to just federate as likes and dislikes.

  • rglullis@communick.news
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    How would that work? How would an admin separate downvotes from brigaders and legitimate users who happen to downvote a comment?

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Banning trolls would be doable - they’d have patterns where they target specific users across many different communities. If the same user downvotes everything I’ve ever said, from controversial political takes to pictures of food to posts about gardening, that’s probably a malicious user.

      But “brigading” doesn’t mean anything and I don’t respect the concept. You can’t ban it because you can’t define it in a way that doesn’t include normal usage of the site.

      • rglullis@communick.news
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        If the same user downvotes everything I’ve ever said,

        Right. How would you know what “the same user” is? Let’s say that your posts get downvoted at random intervals by 5-10 users in the first 45-120 minutes. They all have different user names. What are you going to do? Create a report against any particular user and hope that the mods look into it?

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          If everyone’s votes are public then it seems trivial to see how any particular user votes.

          If user shithead69420 downvotes literally everything I post, they’re probably not a good faith user.

          • rglullis@communick.news
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago

            Yes, but that’s kind of my point?

            if downvotes are public, the admin of your instance can see who is downvoting you and then they can take action. If the downvotes are coming from an instance that hides the real user for every vote, you and the admin are SOL.

            • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              4 days ago

              Oh I see, you were talking about a hypothetical where all instances hide their votes and so no one knows who is voting on anything.

              My assumption was that these vote records would remain transparent on most instances because the instances that hide their votes just get defederated, because those are always going to be instances where trolls hide.

              • rglullis@communick.news
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 day ago

                Yeah, let’s make things less abstract and talk about real examples.

                piefed.social is not sending the real voters out. You think that alone should be grounds to get lemmy.ml (your instance) to defederate them. Am I understanding you correctly?

                • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  Oh no, I think defederation is only necessary when an instance becomes a problem. Until piefed.social becomes a haven for trolls to manipulate vote counts (which might never happen) then it’s fine.

                  But if a dozen anonymized piefed.social votes start downvoting everything I say because they’re monitoring my account then their admins would need to do something about it. If they didn’t, I’d want defederation.