potato-peeler

> Though I won't downvote (flag, I guess on posts) you. This time :)

I did get a laugh to see the irony in the end :)

> Downvoting is simply that, IMHO, nothing more and nothing less than "I disagree with you".

So why is it tied to a quality of a post? You can simply reply you don’t agree. But that takes effort, so you downvote. But if you reply, that has no measurable value to tie to the quality of a post, even though words carry more meaning.

So somewhere your disagreement to something is perceived differently if you reply vs if you just downvote.

  Downvoting is not simply downvoting, friend.

> "I think you're wrong" is ... just fine as a reason

I don’t agree with this.

——

I could have ended there but If I don’t expand on “I don’t agree with this” and simply end it with a full stop, does it tell you anything? Neither it tells someone else anything. For such cases, you don’t engage.

Which is what I am saying, if you choose to downvote then you have to mandatorily provide reason. The qualitative reason matches the quantitative instrument. Have you not come across a post/comment and feel odd to see many upvotes/downvotes but little justification about the votes?

Obviously. But HN does not install threshold for someone to start upvoting. Which in itself does not represent quality. The entire voting system does not makes sense.

> Also, a lot of downvoting on the internet is just "I disagree with you", or "I don't like what you're saying". It can be personal, and not necessarily useful to the original poster.

They will reduce or be discarded. If a system recognises that you don’t add value, then either such users will be forced to put in effort or simply be discouraged to pollute any post.

Platforms like Reddit suffer because you can coordinate with many users to push an agenda, since their is no accountability from users who only upvote or downvote. That’s why bot farm and coordinated campaigns thrive.

> Comes with the cost of putting yourself out there. Not everyone is going to like it, and you won’t agree with the reasons.

Even someone downvoting a post is expressing their opinion. Current Issue is, person downvoting is anonymous, provides no reason and can’t be held liable for their own action. This is ironic, if they also put themselves out there.

Inadvertently, down voters have a larger say in shaping a discussion even though their level of participation is minimal instead of someone who takes the effort to provide a well structured opinion.

This balance of power is skewed.

If downvoting means to disagree, one should know why.

They don’t unfortunately but it is a good reference for me to check how it looks on previous versions of browsers and less powerful devices. That way I know if the UI or UX needs improvement.

ios updates unfortunately ties everything to a single batch. Unlike android. I have an older blackberry, that still gets latest app updates.

What is even hilarious is ads render with pixel perfection on older devices. So for some reason, ad networks care about browser compatibility than devs putting the same ads on their incompatible website.

Even though I provided a direct link to wcag principles and guidelines, you still are too lazy to read.

When you say something is minimal, you are implying that what little you provide will also work. Which in this case is clearly not.

motherfuckingwebsite.com is more minimal and usable than these frameworks.