I saw this post the other day:
What is the exact meaning of a misogynist person?
I watched it get posted and then a flurry of downvotes immediately followed.
I think people saw the word “misogynist” and didn’t bother to interpret what the OP was asking and then just downvoted the post.
The community name does include the word “stupid” in its name so even if you think OP’s question was ignorant there’s still no need to downvote it because it was posted in the right place. In addition, reading what OP wrote in the header shows that he or she was generally posting for edification reasons and not as a troll.
So, my conclusion is that:
Everyone online is suffering from a case of:
TLDR + trigger word = I know what angle to take in this debate.
What are some other trigger words used in post titles that causes a scenario like this to happen?
Fellowship.
At least from me. It’s lunatic christian speech for “friendship”, as if having friends without the bible being involved is dangerously queer.
If I see someone using the word fellowship outside a LotR discussion, I’ll downvote because they’re almost certainly an evangelical, christian nationalist or some such danger to the world.
Well you shouldn’t base your posts on whether or not people will “downvote” it. If they do it’s usually because you’ve told the truth or said something they’d rather not hear. And after all, this isn’t supposed to be a popularity contest. Online forums are the last place you should be seeking validation or a sense of self-worth, because you usually won’t get it.
You should be willing to post honestly and openly about anything. If it gets downvoted, so be it. I see it as almost a way of measuring how much of what I said really affected people.
“Trigger”, ironically.
Like… what will actually bring on a lot of downvotes is not just disagreeing with people (though of course it will), but doing it in a specific way. Specifically acting like you’re trying to start shit. The misogyny thing there is ringing alarm bells because if you wanted to know what the obvious and incontroversial definition was, you’d look it up and it would take ten seconds.
The internet is full of people trolling and trying to disguise it as “Just Asking Questions”/JAQing off. Either arguing or trying to get people arguing, while having what they believe is “plausible” deniability because after all “it’s just a question bro”.
It is rarely as hard to spot as they think.
A lot of things of things get significant downvotes that aren’t warranted. It really is amazing. I think there are a lot of negative people here.
It’s the key problem with online upvote systems, you’ll always get people that downvote/upvote because they disagree/agree with something rather than whether something is helpful or contributes to healthy discussion. On the other hand, removing the downvote ensures you never really know if something at face value is good or not and you potentially waste the user’s time, at that point you might as well remove the upvote as well because it doesn’t benefit the user and it’s just there to stroke a person’s ego.
I really like the kbin system for this reason. Voting is public so we can see exactly who upvoted or downvoted us.
Except kbin doesn’t federate downvotes, so if people outside our instance downvote us we don’t see it. And there’s no point in us downvoting them unless we’re trying to send a signal to others in kbin.
Makes for way less “downvote to disagree” and much more obvious when some turkey is using alts to upvote themselves everywhere.
Can be improved by ignoring votes on posts from people who haven’t actually opened the post, and also ignoring votes entirely from serial downvoters. You could even make certain votes more powerful, say if someone who never votes on something decides to vote - that should weigh more than someone who votes everything (especially if they upvote or downvote everything)
Serial downvoters maybe. But more powerful votes is just asking for account farming.
Which already happens, but in any case, that’s easily solvable too. Accounts that never engage with anything = low power, accounts that engage a lot and then vote wisely = high power.
Cue tons of bot statements.
It’s not perfect. I’ve seen anwers that sounded good get more upvotes than the correct anwer. This especially reinforces urban legends.
And we have some idiots around. Happens to me occasionally that I give short and concise and correct answers, but they get one or two downvotes.
I don’t think it was the one word, it was more likely the ‘exact definition of a …’ which sounds like someone who wants to argue about whether some contextless edge case meets a definition that they could easily do a search for.
That is before even looking at the post history of the person who asked.
There are a lot of people who assume that when there is a simple question on a contentious topic, that it will inevitably lead to sealioning…
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning
Yes, it’s possible the guy was being sincere, but you’ve been on the Internet long enough to know how it will probably turn out
AI, Tesla, SUV, X, Israel, Elon/Musk, Apple and Amazon to name a few
Complaining about downvotes or bans will also earn you downvotes and sometimes bans.
This
Edit: downvotes, really?
Talking about complaining about bans? bAnNeD
Not so much a trigger word, but when people create brand new alts just to post in this community, AskLemmy, or UnpopularOpinions and then delete them soon after (taking any meaningful comments along with them). Might as well downvote those since they’re just going to disappear anyway.
when people create brand new alts just to post in this community
Just like this post 😅
Begging for a specific type of user interaction (“Upvote to spread awareness,” “Don’t downvote!,” “Read till the end”) will almost always get a 👎 and move on from me.
There is no “trigger”, you not having dealt with people like that enough to recognise all of the glaring red flags (or perhaps being the one who posted them in the first place?) doesn’t mean they aren’t there, that post is 100% a troll. As is this one.
There has been a lot of MRA style rage bait being posted recently, my guess is they have fewer people to troll on reddit (not because there are significantly fewer people, but because most of those who would actively disagree with them are no longer there to) so they’re trying to feed their sad little egos on here instead.
The solution is to block and move on, as I will proceed to do now…AI is becoming a trigger word for me.
I think they did not get downvoted for having the word misogynistic in title, but rather because it looks like a ragebait post created only to argue on the points.
Yup, I remember that post and I agree with you.
I think this post would have done better as a meta post than a question, because the question portion feels shoehorned in
Generally I agree with the sentiment that people voting on Lemmy sometimes don’t look at what community it’s posted to. With the smaller userbase, more people see each post but some users miss the culture / practices of the community before commenting and voting. This community was having similar issues, but it’s been better recently
Now as for that post:
-
the community nostupidquestions is a good catchall for most questions, but it isn’t a “ask questions with no rules” comm
-
even the reddit version had rules around bad faith questions. “Rule 9: No disguised rants, agenda posts, potstirring, disruptive topics”.
That doesn’t mean no controversial questions, but rather no bad faith questions. If it’s not clear, I lean towards giving the OP the benefit of the doubt. If I feel that they have an agenda or are asking in bad faith, I’ll also downvote and/or report it.
-
I don’t think it is about trigger words. I think it is more like some comments sound like they could be done in bad faith. Sometimes people is really trying to learn, other times there is a troll.
