Ban members from downvoting

[Jordan Miller]

Hola! So I've encountered something interesting. 

We have a warning points system.

If a user reaches 5 points for example, they are restricted from posting for 24 hours. 

Problem is... they retaliate by going on a downvoting Reputation spree and downvoting other members incessantly. 

I don't want to necessarily ban them from visiting, just posting.

I'd love to see an option to stop members from also being able to use Reputation. Thoughts?

[CoffeeCake]

8 minutes ago, breatheheavy said:

Hola! So I've encountered something interesting. 

We have a warning points system.

If a user reaches 5 points for example, they are restricted from posting for 24 hours. 

Problem is... they retaliate by going on a downvoting Reputation spree and downvoting other members incessantly. 

I don't want to necessarily ban them from visiting, just posting.

I'd love to see an option to stop members from also being able to use Reputation. Thoughts?

Absolutely. Have seen this issue as well. We'd like to see the options to restrict posting expanded to optionally include using reactions and private messaging.

[13.]

+1 for this suggestion.

[Joel R]

@breatheheavy Two possible solutions:

1.  One immediate fix is to change the reputation score per each reaction to only positive or neutral.  

For example, if you have a Downvote or Dislike reaction, mark the reputation as Neutral.  This way it won't count against the actual reputation score of each member, even if users go downvoting.  

2.  A longer-term solution, and perhaps more beneficial to the overall health of the community, is to only offer positive sentiment reactions to begin with.   The biggest platforms in the world, from Reddit or Facebook to MeWe to Amino Apps, only offer positive sentiment reactions.

[Square Wheels]

1 hour ago, Joel R said:

A longer-term solution, and perhaps more beneficial to the overall health of the community, is to only offer positive sentiment reactions to begin with. 

Yup, we did that right from the beginning.  My most active site is a small bunch of people that have gotten to know each other over the years.  They've joked about how they can give negative points, I pointed out at best they can give 0, or 1, but never negative.

[CoffeeCake]

7 minutes ago, Square Wheels said:

Yup, we did that right from the beginning.  My most active site is a small bunch of people that have gotten to know each other over the years.  They've joked about how they can give negative points, I pointed out at best they can give 0, or 1, but never negative.

This is also what we did, however then certain positive reactions, used out of context, became the negative. However, the original request + plus a restriction on private messages is still a need.

[Jordan Miller]

4 hours ago, Joel R said:

@breatheheavy Two possible solutions:

1.  One immediate fix is to change the reputation score per each reaction to only positive or neutral.  

For example, if you have a Downvote or Dislike reaction, mark the reputation as Neutral.  This way it won't count against the actual reputation score of each member, even if users go downvoting.  

2.  A longer-term solution, and perhaps more beneficial to the overall health of the community, is to only offer positive sentiment reactions to begin with.   The biggest platforms in the world, from Reddit or Facebook to MeWe to Amino Apps, only offer positive sentiment reactions.

Appreciate the suggestions! 

I talked with my moderators about removing the -1 entirely. We decided to keep it for now.

We find it to be useful if you want to disagree with someone without quoting them.

Yes, forums are meant to generate comments, but often times it could lead to an argument by responding to someone's comment that's either negative or you disagree with.

A -1 is like 'yeah, saw what you read, not feeling it at alllll'

I can understand the logic that these big corporations like FB and IG don't use it, so we should consider following suit, but our forums are much more intimate than these Internet juggernauts, therefore I think people deserve intimate reactions (like negative reputation). 

If someone comes on my site and writes POP MUSIC SUCKS as their comment, it deserves to be downvoted versus just left there lol. 

Hope that makes sense!

2 hours ago, Paul E. said:

However, the original request + plus a restriction on private messages is still a need.

💯 🙏 

[ahc]

5 hours ago, Joel R said:

Reddit

Reddit works on a karma system and allows users to upvote and downvote all content, which gives or subtracts karma and allows users to have good or bad reputations.  Users with bad reputations are then given posting restrictions and are susceptible to having their content automatically removed.

Reddit is a perfect example of what he's asking for, actually.

[MMXII]

7 hours ago, Joel R said:

is to only offer positive sentiment reactions

Then however the whole reputation system becomes obsolete. I like the idea that users have a reputation score based on feedback they get by other members.

The real issue with negative reactions is that most users take it personally. They are not able to distinguish between content that one disagrees with and the user itself (which one can still "like").

I always wanted to see an extra option, allowing me to use, but not to show certain reactions (e.g. negative ones) at all. This way the user who received a negative reaction does not even notice -- or maybe just notices that his/her reaction score went down by 1, but cannot see where exactly the -1 has been given. Of course this can be confusing ("Why did my score go down?"). In that case the option could work slightly different: Display the reaction, but do not show the user who has given the reaction.

[Matt]

ACP > Members > Groups > (Edit a group) > Social Tab

There's an option to limit how many reps they can give in a day. This will prevent a massive retaliation.

However, you should always lead with kindness.

I personally do not think you should allow members to attack each other by downvoting content. It creates a negative environment for many users which can turn toxic very fast.

I'd rather reward good content, and ignore poor content.

[13.]

Partially related suggestion:

 

[Jordan Miller]

7 hours ago, Matt said:

ACP > Members > Groups > (Edit a group) > Social Tab

There's an option to limit how many reps they can give in a day. This will prevent a massive retaliation.

Appreciate the suggestion! However, I would love to limit just negative reactions versus all. I feel weird on limiting how many +1 reactions a member could give in a day. 

 

7 hours ago, Matt said:

I personally do not think you should allow members to attack each other by downvoting content. It creates a negative environment for many users which can turn toxic very fast.

Agreed! Which is why I would love to have an option to limit them from using the negative reaction tool versus removing it entirely. 😇 

[Joel R]

21 hours ago, breatheheavy said:

I talked with my moderators about removing the -1 entirely. We decided to keep it for now.

We find it to be useful if you want to disagree with someone without quoting them.

Personally I agree.  I find that occasionally stirring the pot helps stoke user engagement!  

I would recommend that you go with my first suggestion, which is what I implement on my community.  You still offer thumbs down or negative reactions, but that those negative sentiment reactions don't impact user reputation.  

I had two members start a reaction war last year.  (Most activity ever from those users 🤣!). When I explained that they were welcome to continue disliking each other's content but it would have zero impact to each users reputation, it petered out pretty quickly.  

If your goal is peace in earth and goodwill towards men, the second route is probably better 🕊️.

[Morrigan]

I use the neutral reaction for disagree. It gives people the ability to voice their opinion without making the end user feel like the world is ending because someone didn't agree with them.

[ahc]

19 hours ago, Matt said:

I personally do not think you should allow members to attack each other by downvoting content. It creates a negative environment for many users which can turn toxic very fast.

I'd rather reward good content, and ignore poor content.

I understand your perspective, but I disagree with part of it.  I don't look at downvoting as an "attack", and that comparison is sorta the mentality that can make it become toxic.  Like numerous other users in the past have said when this topic gets brought up, there's no point in advertising having a reputation system if your reputation can only be positive in my opinion.  It's like video games that pretend to give you freedom of choice, but in the end you're always locked into playing the role of the do-gooder hero.

Our website utilizes both positive and negative reactions, and in doing so it has helped trim out toxic and malicious users, or forces them to change their ways, without the community feeling like big brother(staff) is always watching or trying to get involved when technically no rule violation has occurred.  A reputation system like Reddit's would be the dream.  😋

Edited September 12, 2020 by ahc