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.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] leMe@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 1 week ago (2 children)

FOR

Yes the data is available to anyone, but at least it involves some technical prowess.

The amount of times i have seen people discuss some users votes and what they interpret into it is just weird. let them at least dig for the stuff a little bit.

from a privacy standpoint it would be great, if the data could even be hidden from admins. while still allowing to do some verification (like in these governance threads). but that is a problem for the lemmy devs.

[–] lena@gregtech.eu 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Votes are public on kbin and mbin too. Without even logging in.

Regarding hiding votes from admins, that's impossible without crippling moderation tools and allowing vote spam to happen freely, because admins would not be able to investigate. And that's just not how ActivityPub works. Votes are public.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] rivvvver@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 1 week ago (1 children)

voting for. i understand the info is available either way, but im in favor of raising the hurdle for this data to be collected.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Numuruzero@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I'm voting FOR. To be honest, after reading the comments, I do find the argument convincing that we shouldn't enable the illusion of security. But, on the other hand, I strongly believe that creating a tool to specifically investigate particular individuals, even if it was already technically possible, is ripe for abuse.

Literally any barrier to entry can give some angry individual a chance to cool down before they go on a brigade against the target of their rage. I'd slightly prefer if we don't enable them.

All that said, if it's not this tool it will probably be another, so my vote is mostly symbolic.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] anarchiddy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Against.

A harder question for me is whether or not to get rid of public downvotes altogether. I think most interactions would be less hostile without the downvote option at all.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] qfe0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Against. Generally I prefer the option of being anonymous, but we shouldn't promote a false sense of security with a tool that doesn't accomplish the job.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MysticMushroom1776@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I don't think so, votes are public by nature, and it is useful to be able to find where and how users vote to make judgements based on vote manipulation. I say this as someone who has dealt with huge amounts of vote manipulation in my own communities.

Although the fact they are offering opt outs from instance admins instead of making it censorship/defederation hardened does make me lose faith in the integrity of lemvotes as a service since it no longer will show a majority of votes due to admins opting out.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Geth@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 week ago (4 children)

ITT people not understanding that their votes are basically public no matter what. This tool might as well be one of a thousand and we're just playing wack-a-mole. Kind of a waste of time to bother with it, instead lemmy should get better.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] young_broccoli@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 1 week ago (21 children)

Against. Votes being public makes me vote better. It stops me from angrily downvoting stuff I dont like when im in a bad mood.

load more comments (21 replies)
[–] dysprosium@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

in FAVOR: even if it's a bit of a facade, it gives off the signal to future devs that privacy is still very much a desired thing, even here, and not an after thought.

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

As others have said, it seems that comments and votes on Lemmy are public by default, and the issue of anonymization should be directed towards redesigning how Lemmy and even ActivityPub shares information.

That being said, we on db0 have less control over those softwares because they underpin our instance here on Lemmy. For what we do have control over, I'd expect this instance to preserve the privacy of its users as much as possible.

I also agree with others that opting out of Lemvotes means one more deterrent for bad actors to abuse the system. We don't want to make it easier for people to spy on and stalk others, even if this opting out doesn't fix the root cause.

I vote Aye for now, only so far as we continue this conversation to address privacy overall in the Fediverse.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Martineski@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (6 children)

I support it but it feels pointless given it's just trying to treat symptoms and not the core issue which is the ability to get them in the first place. I don't think that there's even any good solution for that given the decentralised nature of the fediverse which sucks.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] lemonmelon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'm against opting out. Whether Lemvotes, vote federation, or the voting system as a whole are good or bad isn't the matter at hand. This vote is either for or against plugging our collective noses and pretending everything eternally smells like lilacs.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

In my opinion, it's a good thing. Anyone wanting the information for nefarious purposes only needs to spin up their own instance and they get it. This just gives the tools to everyone easily.

I think the illusion that votes are private should be crushed, because they aren't and you should be aware of that.

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

I'm not a fan of this, it gives a false sense of privacy in the Fediverse. Voting data is public even if specific tools to view it decide to cater to the desires of admins. It's very easy for developers to just not do that, and it has been done before.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] potosi@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Against: you depend on the lemvotes instance implementing the opt-out feature, you can just as easily fork it and remove it

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] alsaaas@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Anything that makes it harder for the average .world brigarder to harass people because of their voting patterns is a welcome change. So naturally I'm voting "aye" and for opting out of any further such tools/other instances of them when they will eventually pop up.

I am aware that votes are not private, but the bar for exploiting that is on the flor when you just have to copy a URL

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] laserjet@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 week ago (2 children)

IN FAVOR OF OPTING OUT

Public voting is one of my least favorite features of lemmy/threadiverse.

I don't know if it's possible to have a federated network where votes are totally private but it would be a strong preference for me. I thought there were already some tools instances could use to protect their users privacy?

If it is implausible to totally obscure it, then I think we need more user controls to avoid accidentally voting for something that leaves a breadcrumb trail about you. Such as reminding new users their votes are public, having an easy way to see overview of all your own votes, option to remove the vote buttons from the UI, being able to unvote all your past votes (which would still be imperfect of course).

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] imetators@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Against.

Not that I would use it anyway, but I bet it helps in finding bots that manipulate certain posts. R****t has ton of these and they end up undetected, especially with new private profile settings. I'd rather show everyone what I voted for and let them know I am real rather than have bunch of people in threads promoting corpo things as if they are real people.

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

Opt Out. We don't want others spying our internet updoots.

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

After reading the comments in this topic, I am voting AGAINST.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TurtleMelon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I'm in favor of opting out of this, but not because of privacy concerns. Being able to identify how users vote would take away from conversation, as well as discourage users who would rather avoid being dragged into the conversation from voting at all. Sure, the data is already available to those willing to spin up an instance, but the overwhelming majority of people wouldn't bother. This really should be opt in instead of opt out.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Ice@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'm for - whilst I'm aware lemmy votes are attainable via one mean or another, opting out sends a message that whilst yes, it is possible to attain voting information, it should not be considered normal and socially acceptable to do so.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] basiclemmon98@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I say opt-out, less easy-access data is always better.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] UnrefinedChihuahua@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

For. More privacy > less privacy, even if it's minimal.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 week ago (6 children)

The privacy would be a facade tbh.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Enzyoo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›