That's actually surprising to me, because I'd think that down voting whack stuff would make things better overall. What was happening? It's not like people know who it was, or were down votes done out of spite?

I also couldn't help but notice some super conservative instances I've seen have down votes disabled.

[–] ClathrateG@hexbear.net 17 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

My perspective is that without them bad takes get called out, and if the poster is redeemable they can engage with constructive criticism and learn something from the replies

Rather than people downvoting and moving on which can lead to resentment on a posters behalf if they don't understand why a position of theirs may be getting downvoted

[–] anaesidemus@hexbear.net 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Downvotes were disabled because posts that touched on trans issues were routinely downvoted, often by the same users. Those users were purged and downvotes disabled to good effect.

Uninformed posters are given information if they are sincere.

Malicious posters get dunked on before getting banned.

It has worked very well in my opinion.

[–] YeetPics@mander.xyz 1 points 1 week ago

Yea, great way to shut down dissenting opinions and keelhaul any potential for learning or growth.

Cheers