this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2024
122 points (95.5% liked)

askchapo

22692 readers
313 users here now

Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.

Rules:

  1. Posts must ask a question.

  2. If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.

  3. Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.

  4. Try !feedback@hexbear.net if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I really wanted to post this on !traaaaaaannnnnnnnnns@hexbear.net but I'm not trans myself and I didn't want to take up their space.

Basically, the devs of Lemmy are looking to make upvotes public to everyone. Right now, I believe voter identities are known to server admins and mods.

I don't have a strong opinion on this myself, either for or against, as I write this comment, but I'm wondering if there's something I'm missing, frankly as a cishet dude.

But also... I've kinda lost trust in Nutomic making decisions about the software that won't make things worse for trans people since his comments on the Olympics were made public. Dessalines has (so far) at least tolerated Nutomic's transphobia despite whatever prior rhetoric. Frankly, I am suspicious that trans people don't matter to the Lemmy dev team...to be charitable...so I'd really like to hear your thoughts.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NaevaTheRat@vegantheoryclub.org 4 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (9 children)

yeah an alternative proposal is they're only public to the local instance admin and it groups its votes, sends them to the instance hosting the content, which adds them as totals annotated with the server.

But they're still not private. Instance admins can see them, and you can still see which instances are voting on what content which doesn't really improve much. Especially for small instances (e.g. if I have 10 people on an instance and only one user was active in a date range all votes are theirs).

Given how there are already problematic incentives to large instances I'm not sure we want to add to administrator (and everyone they care to share with) power based on size. Or deincentise users from signing up to small instances.

They shouldn't be private. Have you seen the way that lemmy.world uses botting to force this site and others to defederate after drowning them out?

Just how far are you people going to take the cargo cult of Reddiquette?

Why are you even imitating mainstream social media rules from the 3rd most racist site in the universe? What broke people here?

[–] NaevaTheRat@vegantheoryclub.org 3 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (2 children)

I am discussing possible implementations with someone, pointing out that necessarily votes are public to at least someone. Not endorsing it.

If you read my closing paragraph you will see I come down against private votes.

I don't know if it's intended but you're coming across very aggressive and I don't feel there is cause, even if I disagreed with you.

I'm used to pinging everyone above me, consider it a general addition to the chat in the entire thread. Seeing people actually hashing out completely anonymous voting, making this flimsy platform even more vulnerable to manipualtion by petty psychos like myself, makes me even more pessimistic about people's ability to learn from experiences with open source social media projects that imitate features which only work for corpos

[–] NaevaTheRat@vegantheoryclub.org 2 points 4 weeks ago

The weird thing about this whole debate is it's already public, just only to an elite of people with basic technical skill and some cash to burn + all their friends.

I'm half tempted to spin up a server and just post the votes of everyone who federates to prove the stupid point.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)