I don't yet have sufficient karma to downvote, but personally, I'd like to see all downvotes accompanied with a note or counter-point.
Perhaps an additional "are you sure" popup after a downvote would serve the purpose. From there, instead of downvoting spam, we could use a flag button.
Yes, I am aware that pg and other long-time curators of this site are still thinking about ways to refine the user interface. I personally, having observed many online discussion sites with many kinds of interfaces, think that active curation of the community members (including participant bans) is more important than the specific details of technology for commenting or karma voting. On some sites, administrators lack the spine to use their mops to clean up the mess.
There has been consideration of using more flagging and less downvoting for certain kinds of posts, and I'd be happy to see what management here comes up with by way of experiments with new interfaces.
My problem with PG's take in that comment is that it borders on passive aggressive behavior. Just today, I achieved enough Karma to downvote, but I don't plan on using it.
Why? Because I don't think it's necessary, and I find more value in promoting value, than trying to tear down something that I disagree with.
I believe that making it easier to lose Karma than to gain it is counter-productive, and will lead to bashful expression. In other words, that downvoting exists, without the necessity to back up said downvote, leads to a feeling that you can't openly express yourself, which is why we see comments like "I'm probably going to get downvoted for this, but..."
That's a fair assessment. I don't really see a problem with the current system either, I just know that downvotes without a comment in reply agitate me. Maybe I should lighten up :)
>I don't yet have sufficient karma to downvote, but personally, I'd like to see all downvotes accompanied with a note or counter-point.
I downvoted you because I disagree with you. Is that the kind of note, you'd like to see clutter up comment threads?
Lots of little notes about why various readers downvoted various comments would be a net loss for the reader. Also, I don't see a reason why downvotes should require any more justification than upvotes. If people hardly ever downvote, then the way to get a lot of karma is to write a lot of comments. If there's anything the internet provides more than enough of it's volume. I'd gladly sacrifice half the commenting volume in exchange for higher comment quality, but an upvote-only system gets the opposite.
Worse still, if downvotes are rare, then many of the top comments will be those that are particularly controversial or divisive since readers who agree will upvote, but many who disagree just don't feel like taking the time to write a note or counterpoint. In the long run, a mostly upvote system will lead to more inside jokes, more inane internet memes and more loud but poorly reasoned assertions.
And that's why I like the idea - because you replied - dialogue can exist.
I could care about the "I downvoted you because I disagree with you" part. I'm more interested in what you said next. And even though I disagree with what you said, I don't feel the need to downvote you to say that. That's what discussion is for.
Second, you downvoted me when I was already in the positive, and I find that less aggravating than downvoting to the negative, which reduces readability of a comment, and reduces the opportunity for dialogue.
I find that the quality of the community makes a much greater difference than the problem of upvotes as you describe it.
Perhaps an additional "are you sure" popup after a downvote would serve the purpose. From there, instead of downvoting spam, we could use a flag button.