Fediverse

Because the Electoral College has worked out so well for us here in the US. /s

As someone who's actual real life votes have been watered down all my life, I really don't want to apply that logic elsewhere.

Why not just make new account's votes only count for 3/5 of a vote and send those in aggregate? /s

The real solution is to be aware of unmoderated / malicious instances. Vote manipulation is something I actively watch for, and I didn't even see this campaign because I'd already defederated from both of the identified instances as they were already frequent sources of spam. After looking into them, neither seemed actively moderated and both had open signups. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out how that's going to end up.

So basically the electoral college? No thanks.

Just sort by new.

Wait, so all the votes from Lemmy.world would have the same weight as the votes from lazysoci.al? Interesting idea

Lemmy version 1.1.0 will include the ability for mods to remove votes. Hopefully also logged to the modlog, because we know some mods will use it for some other purpose.

https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/issues/5569

the idea boils down to either outside instances aggregating votes made on their side and sending final voting result on a scale -1/0/1 or alternatively this aggregation could be done by the hosting community

Could you provide an example calculation? I'm not getting it. Do you want to map values from one range to another e.g [-1000,1000] to [-1,1]? Will each instance have its own mapping?

Also, computationally, I'm not sure how this is going to work iteratively. From what I understand, activitypub sends events either singular or batched to other servers e.g User X votes up, that's an event sent, User Y votes down, that's another event sent. If I'm not mistaken, lemmy doesn't store the events it receives so reconstituting a vote tally isn't possible.

I kinda get where you're coming from, but I'm not sure it's the right solution.

Anti Commercial-AI license

My pet peeve is people downvoting in communities they aren't subscribed to about posts they aren't interested in. They just sort by new, and when they see something they don't like, they smash that downvote button without even looking at the post or contents.

Part of it is because we all have unlimited votes; people vote without thinking. It would be different if everyone had a finite number of votes to use. And you get awarded a few votes for making a comment or post. Maybe award extra votes for commenting in small communities.

This would serve 2 purposes. 1.) People would use their votes a lot more thoughtfully. 2.) It would encourage people to comment and post more.

The downside is that someone could set up a bot to spam posts and comments into a dead community just to rack up votes.

The forums I've enjoyed the most didn't have voting and I'd rather that Lemmy just shut it off. VBB has a "thank" button you can click on posts, but they still show up in chronological order. That's less gameable and less subject to outrage amplification and similar social media hazards. This isn't Facebook and we don't need to reproduce Facebook's evil.

kinda fuels centralisation

Sort by new (for subscribed only if you don't want everything).

That's even how I used to use reddit (I even had a bookmark folder of subreddits with links to the /new/ view).

No crazy scheme like this will work, because creating any form of anonymous account is super easy.

What we need is to add a layer of trust assignment and authorization system based on reputation, like what Fediseer does but built-in into the application. Then we can quarantine new users, contain their actions until the admin gives explicit approval, auto reject follows if they don't have at least N trusted people vouching for them, etc...

I don't think this is a good idea. I would prefer the votes of new accounts having a lower impact.