this post was submitted on 09 Apr 2025
44 points (89.3% liked)

Fedigrow

1233 readers
101 users here now

To discuss how to grow and manage communities / magazines on Lemmy, Mbin, Piefed and Sublinks

Resources:

Megathreads:

Rules:

  1. Be respectful
  2. No bigotry

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
 

Is it a PTB move ([email protected]) to ban a user if their only activity in a community is downvoting posts?

The behaviour baffles me a bit. If they dislike the majority of the posts in a community, why are they subscribed? Or if they are browsing by /all, why have they not blocked the community? Are they under the mistaken impression that Lemmy has an algorithm which uses downvotes as an indicator for "show me less of this"?

Has anyone else encountered a "serial downvoter" in any of their communities?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (4 children)

I've encountered a few of those users, and personally I ban them.

My criteria:

  1. They must be downvoting a majority of posts, where it's clear there is no real discrimination on quality (as then some posted close together would be spared)
  2. I notice it happening across multiple communities/instances
  3. I see the same name again and again, day after day
  4. I never see that user upvote anything anywhere

I know there was one user who was mass downvoting to, according to them, mark posts as read.

I thought that was fairly ridulous, as why not just mass upvote instead to achieve the same effect? Wasn't sure I fully bought that, as they were dismissive when someone asked them to stop.

Lemmy is still small, and it seems unwise to allow mass downvoting to potentially discourage or limit the reach of people putting in the effort to help this place grow.

I've never had a downvoter message me to ask why they were banned or dispute it, so I figure they didn't even notice that they no longer saw the stuff that caused them to downvote in the first place.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago

one user who was mass downvoting to, according to them, mark posts as read

Wow, I've not heard that one before. It does seem fairly ridiculous.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I doubt anyone would ever object to banning for the behaviour you described here. But unless I'm way off base, I don't think that's what OP is talking about.

What you're talking about is basically inauthentic behaviour. Maybe it's a bot, maybe it's a real person deliberately interfering with a community using sock puppet accounts. What I think OP is talking about is a real user using the platform in an essentially honest way, but which happens to involve downvoting all the posts from one community. There could be a few reasons behind that, such as the example OP described of a user who actually has no interest in ever seeing the community, but doesn't know how or doesn't think to block the community. On all other communities, their behaviour appears totally normal.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Ah. I don't think I've encountered that type of user yet. For the users I described in my comment, I give them a full instance ban. But In the case you describe, I think it'd be appropriate for a mod of the targeted community to ban them, but otherwise leave them be.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

In the case you describe, I think it'd be appropriate for a mod of the targeted community to ban them

I thought that at first too, but I recently thought of a counterexample, so I'm not so sure. See my top-level comment if you're interested.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago

I agree that reaching out to a user like that and having them stop would be the best outcome. Though In the context of the thread, I don't think a mod who didn't reach out before banning would be a PTB (not that you're suggesting that, just elaborating my thoughts).

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago

Same feeling here

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

My one school of thought is that popular posts at the top of the frontpage deserve to be downvoted in order to refresh the content.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Why not just sort by Hot, New, or Scaled instead? The popular posts in Active sort will naturally go away as discussion in them dies down (comments boost posts too).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago (2 children)

I don't actually do it and sort by top hour or six hour or hot. But it could be a reason to downvote if the same post is up for days and downvoting hides posts.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 days ago

It's possible to hide posts without downvoting as well.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 days ago

If a post has been up for days, it is probably in the high hundreds upvotes. It would need a huge amount of downvotes to bring it away.

Also, downvoting high quality posts make the "Top of the Week/Month/Year/All time" less relevant