this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2025
154 points (70.3% liked)

/0 Governance

265 readers
3 users here now

A community for discussion and democratic decision making in the Divisions by zero.

Anyone with voting rights can open a governance thread and initiate a vote or a discussion. There's no special keywords you must be aware of before you open a thread, but there are some. here's the governance thread manual.

Answers

founded 6 months ago
MODERATORS
 

Update: Thanks mateys for participating! Our instance was really split down the middle on this vote - 49% in favour, 51% against.

After reading all the comments, it honestly seems unlikely to me that private voting will ever be a viable option for Lemmy in any meaningful way, because voting data gets federated out all across the fediverse, so I think on balance the best way forward is just to accept that reality and work under the assumption all votes are public. At least then nobody is lulled into a false sense of security.

Having said that there's an argument to be made for both sides and I don't think there's a "right" answer necessarily. Its more down to personal preference about whether you want/expect private (to the users) voting, or you want to embrace public voting. But until Lemmy can guarantee the privacy of user votes then simply pretending they are private seems like the worst of both worlds.

We might revisit the topic of public/private voting again down the road if Lemmy's developers provide privacy enhancements in that area though.

Cheers, Unruffled.


Hi again mateys!

As most of you are probably aware, since the development of Lemvotes Lemmy votes are no longer private for users.

The way lemvotes works right now afaik, is it uses an admin level account to collect voting data from all federated instances, thus enabling the identification of every voter. This method effectively bypasses the guardrails the developers put in place to keep this info more restricted.

However, the developer of lemvotes has recently developed an "opt out" for instances that don't want their user data collected in this way. So now we have a choice of whether or not to continue. For total transparency, I asked the developer to create an opt out because I wanted to give our users the option to choose that path without defederating from the lemvotes instance.

I think there are (at least) two schools of thought on this topic, which I will attempt to succinctly summarize below:

  1. Votes should be kept private to users as they were only ever meant to be viewable by instance admins. Making votes public to everyone via lemvotes, when users have a reasonable expectation of privacy when it comes to voting, is a betrayal of user trust. It also leads to arguments and a lot of unnecessary drama, caused by users trawling though each others' vote histories.

  2. It's good that voting is transparent and that users have the same tools available as admins to conduct their own investigations into other users. This creates a level playing field and helps hold everyone accountable for their voting patterns.

So now you have some of the context, I'd like to ask our community what are your thoughts on lemvotes... is it a social good or a bad idea?

Personally, I quite like it from an admin perspective - it's a handy tool, and a pretty cool project. But I also have an expectation (mainly from other forms of social media) that users' votes should be kept private from other users, so I still think it's problematic from that perspective.


Proposal: To opt out of lemvotes, so that our users' voting data is kept (at least somewhat) private.

  • To vote FOR the proposal to succeed, upvote the post.
  • To vote AGAINST the proposal, downvote the post.

This will be a simple majority vote. Similar to the last governance topic, I have no clue what the instance sentiment is towards lemvotes, so let's find out! Feel free to add your comments below.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] div0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 1 week ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (5 children)

Acknowledged governance topic opened by https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/u/flatworm7591 Early Bird: a parrot, orangered colors Jolly Roger: an icon of pirate jolly roger skull wearing a hat, in orange-red, black and white colors A book with a loaf of bread in the cover  in orange-red, black and white colors Deck Hand: An icon of anchor crossed with two staves in orange-red, black and white colors First Mate: a pirate ship's steering wheel, orangered color

This is a simple majority vote. The final tally is as follows:

  • For: Vouched: a minimalist compass icon. Orangered color (3), Deck Hand: An icon of anchor crossed with two staves in orange-red, black and white colors (3), Salty Dog: An icon of two crossed cutlasses with a skull in the center in orange-red, black and white colors (1), First Mate: a pirate ship's steering wheel, orangered color (2), Powder Monkey: An icon of powder barrel in orange-red, black and white colors (2)
  • Against: Vouched: a minimalist compass icon. Orangered color (4), MVP: a star icon, in orange-red, black and white colors (2), Threadiverse Enjoyer: An icon of a doubloon with a black hole in the center in orange-red, black and white colors (3), First Mate: a pirate ship's steering wheel, orangered color (2), Salty Dog: An icon of two crossed cutlasses with a skull in the center in orange-red, black and white colors (1)
  • Local Community: +0.6
  • Outsider sentiment: Very Positive
  • Total: -0.4
  • Percentage: 49.00%

This vote has concluded on 2025-08-09 01:29:16 UTC


Reminder that this is a pilot process and results of voting are not set in stone.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] rimu@piefed.social 1 points 5 days ago (2 children)

How does one opt out? I don't see a mechanism on the lemvotes site for it?

Alternatively, what is the instance URL?

[–] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Just get in touch with the developer, Lena. Seems they just need to set an environment variable for you in lemvotes.

[–] rimu@piefed.social 2 points 5 days ago

Thank you 😊

[–] hendu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 77 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I don't see much point in opting out. The data will still be available to anyone who spins up an instance, and this could lead to a big game of whack-a-mole.

Better would be to push the Lemmy devs to find a universal solution.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] lena@gregtech.eu 60 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (12 children)

Hi, Lemvotes dev here. As you can imagine, I believe votes on the Fediverse should be public, because that's just how ActivityPub works. Votes are sent out to every subscribed instance, which can then do whatever it wants with them.

We need to stop pretending votes on Lemmy are private, they're not. By letting anyone view votes (well, they can do that without Lemvotes by setting up their own instance, Lemvotes just lowers the entry barrier), users can see, for example, who's serially downvoting their posts or a community's posts.

Also, I don't think votes being public ruins Lemmy. They're public on bluesky and (virtually) no one is complaining. Additionally, platforms like kbin and mbin, which are part of the Fediverse, already make votes public. So even without Lemvotes, people can view the votes on posts. Lemvotes just makes it a bit more convenient.

The only way to fully prevent anyone other than dbzer0 admins from viewing votes is to disable federation.

The way lemvotes works right now afaik, is it uses an admin level account to collect voting data from all federated instances, thus enabling the identification of every voter. This method effectively bypasses the guardrails the developers put in place to keep this info more restricted.

Just a technical nitpick, this is inaccurate. Lemvotes queries the Lemmy database directly, so instance admins can plug it into the db and Lemvotes is running. I was considering making Lemvotes its own Fediverse actor, so that (1) setting up an instance of Lemvotes would be easier, and (2) opting out would be simpler by simply defederating lemvotes.org (or wherever the instance is running), but after working on it for a bit (the results of my work are on this git branch), I realized I don't know enough about ActivityPub, and that I don't care enough about Lemvotes or Lemmy to spend my time on this, as I have other projects to work on. In case anyone wants to develop that themselves, they're free to do so! Lemvotes is open source.

[–] disobey2623@lemmy.dbzer0.com 32 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Thanks for this insight, it swayed me to vote against the proposal. If votes are already semi-public through federation I'd rather it be transparently public than giving the illusion of privacy.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 48 points 1 week ago (10 children)

Personally I vote against because security through obscurity, isn't. People who want to get this data for malicious purposes can easily get it. It will only affect people trying to do it causally (i.e. To check if someone is a chud).

I personally find the whole voting system in lemmy flawed but that's another story.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 46 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Votes are public though, pretending that they're not is just deceiving users.

Anyone who admins a federated instance, and any of their friends, knows vote counts.

But I also have an expectation (mainly from other forms of social media) that users’ votes should be kept private from other users

This is literally just reddit and hackernews, some of the worst and most astro-turfed socmed. Twitter post nazification too I guess.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] eugenevdebs@lemmy.dbzer0.com 28 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Against.

  • Does not stop voting being public
  • Does nothing for privacy, it doesn't stop how federation sends the info required to vote
  • Useful for moderators in communities where they have haters despite being self contained.
  • Useful for users to know when they have a dedicated hater/fan.
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] SadSadSatellite@lemmy.dbzer0.com 26 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I don't want lemvotes. It sounds like some real reddit shit and it's a terribly dumb word. Not to mention I want less tracking and more anonymity on the internet in general.

[–] Redjard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

This is not going to give anonymity, it at worst gives an increased false sense of anonymity.
Not only could others spin up more copies of lemvotes, last time I checked every mbin instance shows that info freely.

For what I'm concerned this proposal would merely make looking up votes slightly less convenient.

Edit: Yep, mbin still shows votes, no login required: Example

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 26 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (7 children)

Against. ~~As Lena has indicated, this does not require spinning up a full instance and admin account, but just to spin up a copy of LemVotes, which is open source. Easier than that, I've also read that votes are available without admin rights through queries to the Lemmy API. Even easier,~~ the votes are also already public through the *bins and friendica.

EDIT: Lena has clarified that Lemvotes does depend on having a Lemmy instance, and that votes are only available through API to admins.

I understand the use of having a small hurdle to dissuade people, I regularly build them into my scripts at work so people can't accidentally break shit with them. But my point is, removing our instance from LemVotes does not raise that hurdle to any significant degree.

This is a core limitation of ActivityPub. Votes must be sent with username attached for federation to work properly. The data is already out there. Any ActivityPub system that doesn't make them public is just doing so on the front end. It's set dressing, not actual voting privacy.

I don't like that it works this way, but I've chosen to accept it as the cost to be part of the Fediverse, to be uncensorable.

If you want privacy, the path is the same it always has been: rotate accounts regularly.


As far as I'm aware, the only true workaround is in piefed (I think it's piefed at least) where a hidden account with a randomized name is created with your real account, and the hidden one's name is attached to your votes instead of the real account. So it would require your own instance admin to see the link in vote and identity. Or basic levels of observation skills to connect the person posting negative replies is the random username also downvoting.


I also don't like the idea of even being able to opt out. It creates an entirely false sense of security and privacy, and could be seen as a signal that our instance doesn't intend to participate in the wider fediverse transparently and in good faith.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] jwmgregory@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This data isn’t private in the first place. What point is there in opting out of a pinhole when niagara is right there?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] irelephant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think that opting out only makes it harder to find out who voted what, I can still find out who voted what by opening a post in friendica (though it misses a good bit of info).

Giving users the illusion that their votes are private is dangerous.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] 000@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Against.

Facade of privacy is worse. Opting out won't do anything, and it might give people false sense of privacy. Let everyone know their votes are public. In my head, voting on lemmy is equivalent of saying "aye" in real life, that is, you are assenting to something publicly.

I in fact consider this to be a feature, it's helpful in detecting votes manipulation.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Against.

To block it would just further a false sense of privacy. The votes are already public, this just makes that data very slightly more accessible. To pretend otherwise is simply burying our heads in the sand.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] h4x0r@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 1 week ago (11 children)

The fact anyone on db0 would advocate for 'transparency' in the name of surveillance makes me believe either I chose the wrong instance or you did.

Sure, that data is available to admins, but this approach will naturally lead to a chilling effect that directly opposes this instance's supposed principles. I understand the why here, but cannot fathom, with how often data is misconstrued by the malicious in the modern age, anyone would operate or advocate for such a service.

[–] hendu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 27 points 1 week ago

This is exactly why I think we should push for Lemmy as a whole resolving the issue, instead of dealing with vote trackers as they crop up.

[–] Redjard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 1 week ago

That data is available to admins of any instance. Anything federated. That's an impossibly large number of instances to keep track off over information leaks, especially since votes are saved permanently so any leak of any instance would retroactively expose all votes again.
This is not even starting to touch on other activitypub software interpreting votes as inherently public and showing them as such. On mbin, anyone can see votes.

In practice this data simply is irrevocably public until lemmy itself hides it on the protocol layer. Right now, it can't even be properly obfuscated.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] orbituary@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 1 week ago (11 children)

This instance is based greatly on sailing the high seas. Privacy should go hand in hand with that. I don't want my votes to be "investigated" as they reflect my personal opinions and that is sacrosanct.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] a_wild_mimic_appears@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I'm for the opt-out. I am aware of the fact that anyone who has looked into the subject knows that it's easy to get that info, but there's a difference between "I need to actually put a small amount of effort into it" vs. "I just copy the URL". If someone wants to look it up and jumps through the hoops, that's fine by me, but it shouldn't be an everyday thing.

I personally vote on nearly every post and comment i read, and even tho i don't want to push any agenda or discriminate any user, someone who i perceive as a bad actor or who regularly comments stuff that screams "i need to touch grass" might construe (wrongly) that i target them. Tbh, most of the time i don't look at the username when voting.

(but it is pretty interesting that i have submitted around 71000 votes since the API reddit exodus lol)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] misteloct@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Against. Your comment history is even easier to access and it's usually much more sensitive. If you really care about anonymity you need a stronger method.

Downvotes are not a slap in the face. They're the social equivalent of "hey, I disagree with your content or tone". Really it's not a big deal to me if they're public. I've downvoted by accident, or changed my mind before and upvoted later.

Now if you're talking about lemips, a list of user's ip addresses, that's a different story.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›