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

/0 Governance

266 readers
1 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 7 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 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] UnrefinedChihuahua@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 week ago (7 children)

Is the div0 bot broken right now?

[–] nomugisan@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

This whole software seems like it adds nothing to the fediverse. I abstain, and wish to defederate and avoid software like this in the future.

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

I have to believe some sort of system could be designed that can preserve privacy while preventing abuse. Maybe zero knowledge proofs, packet filters or fail2ban. Adaptations would have to be made, of course.

But I expect that exposing everyones' voting habits would enable more vengeance and spite than it would cooperation.

In holding out for a better solution. I choose the lesser evil of risking anonymous abuse over the greater evil of open discord.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] socsa@piefed.social 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Public votes are the biggest problem on Lemmy, and it should be a development priority to make them properly anonymous.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ragebutt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Pointless regardless of how you feel, am I wrong? Like wouldn’t other instances that have federated with this instance lead to comments from here

Private votes are a mixed bag. On one hand they can be abused and lead to brigading and making them public defuses this easily. On the other hand sensitive topics obviously are something one may not want to leave a receipt over. Dunno

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

In favor: activity pub shouldn't have votes from my perspective.

edit: just in case anyone is wondering.

public voting records are a massive safety issue. there is a reason political voting is anonymous. lemmy's voting mechanism is highly dangerous to people as it allows people (and more importantly, governments) to identify and prosecute individuals.

at a minimum lemmy should make it so that voting only goes to the instance hosting the community of the post and after that is not federated.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›