Positive
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Some clarifications about the Downvote

Hi everyone, ✌️

Thank you very much for your feedback in relation to the Downvote. 👎
We totally understand that many/most of you are not happy with it.

However, based on the feedback we're reading, I'd like to clarify some points:

1) If your posts/replies frequently have many good reactions, and sometimes you get 1 or 2 downvotes, out of MANY good reactions, [b]you really shouldn't have to worry[/b]. 👍

2) If there is a user that has been downvoting you in many posts, [b]that user will eventually start seeing less contents from you[/b]. 📉

3) You don't have to worry [b]if a user tries to use multiple accounts to downvote you. Either the system knows about it already, or will know in the future[/b], and that will only go wrong on that user, [u]and never affect you[/u]. 🚩
Only a few users have attempted this so far, and we've sent notifications to those users. The targeted users [u]were not affected[/u] by the fake downvotes.

4) A comment or post will only be pushed down [b]if the amount of downvotes surpass the amount of good reactions[/b] (and only if a [u]minimum[/u] of downvotes was reached, for that to happen). You [u]don't have to worry[/u] about the visibility of your contents being impacted [u]just because of 1 or 2 downvotes, when you got several good reactions[/u] too. 📊

5) Even if a post of yours got more downvotes than good reactions, [b]it doesn't mean that your audience will be impacted on other stories/questions that you post in the future[/b]. It only affects the post that got downvoted. 📚

5) The downvote does have a slight impact on your account reputation, but [b]that impact is VERY negligible[/b]. If you [u]maintain a much higher amount of good reactions, versus the amount of downvotes[/u], [b]your account will NEVER suffer any consequences[/b]. Only accounts who have more downvotes than good reactions are the ones that will be really impacted. 😊



[b]In summary:[/b] You don't have to worry if you get a few downvotes here and there. Only if the amount of downvotes surpasses the amount of good reactions (very rare cases), you would be affected. [b]Only troublemakers will be affected by the downvote.[/b]


I want to apologize again for not being clear in my original post when it was announced.


---

Thank you for your support and we hope you continue to stay with us.

We are constantly listening to your suggestions, so please keep giving them to us, as they are very important to the future of Similar Worlds.

Very kind regards, 🧡
- The SW Team
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Peapod · 61-69, F
This is just my two cents here...

Every single site I have ever been on before this one was NOT enhanced by anything anonymous! If you want a downvote feature, let that person's identity show. Some people only downvote because they dislike [i]you[/i], not your [i]opinion[/i].

Don't we have enough drama on this site as it is?
Piper · 61-69, F
@Peapod When the downvotes became "anonymous" on the last site I particpated on, quite innocuous content started getting downvoted. When there was a post by the admistration inviting input about members not being able to see who up or downvoted them, there was a big outcry of opposition from some...including rarely seen accounts. Allowing those formerly anonymous up and downvotes to be made [i]un[/i]anonymous again, would be "[b]BETRAYAL[/b]!!!" 😲

Not surprisingly, it was exposed just why they were so opposed to it. It's pretty damn petty to downvote even songs on a music post, just for spite.
Peapod · 61-69, F
@Piper Spot on. You know the same mentality I know and it really drove a lot of people away permanently.

The admins were completely responsible for that too since they literally had the wolves guarding the chicken house.
Piper · 61-69, F
@Peapod That decision about moderators on that [i]other[/i] similar site, is one of the few things I felt fine about publicly criticizing. I contacted them privately mostly though, and not even to get anyone kicked off...but just to express and show how one of them in particular was abusing their power as a moderator.

I do appreciate that the owners/administrators of this free site, are inviting input about this new feature. Seems like not attacking them in any personal way as some have, would be a better way to voice opposition.
Peapod · 61-69, F
@Piper I do agree that there is no comparison to what went on in that other place to what is going on here.

It is a shame though that no explanation for the reasons [i]why [/i]they implemented a feature that hardly anyone here wants. It's frustrating when a seemingly negative change is made and feedback doesn't feel heard. Of course there is likely a lot more to it than what we can see from this end.
Piper · 61-69, F
@Peapod Not much of a comparison, except that what happened there with the anonymous downvoting feature, [b]will[/b] surely happen here...too.

It makes no sense to me either, as being any kind of 'positive' change. I've read the explanations for it by the administrators on both posts about it, and it still doesn't.
Peapod · 61-69, F
@Piper It is odd, all around. I am certain it will bring out the worse in some people.