Are you trying to prime people to harass the generals?
Besides, it’s not mass downvoting, it’s just that the increased attention to their accounts revealed a bunch of poorly written comments that people genuinely disagree with and happen to independently decide are worthy of a downvote :)
Are you trying to prime people to harass the generals?
Genuinely not sure what you are referring to. I think it’s reasonable to be a bit annoyed at generals who get you nuked, but I mean, if someone starts going overboard we will also moderate that.
Besides, it’s not mass downvoting, it’s just that the increased attention to their accounts revealed a bunch of poorly written comments that people genuinely disagree with and happen to independently decide are worthy of a downvote :)
Well, in that case, it’s not moderation for downvoting, it’s just increased attention from the moderators re-evaluating the degree to which someone is genuinely contributing positively to the site, and happen to independently decide someone is worthy of some moderation warnings :P
You’re suggesting angry comments as an alternative for mass retributive downvoting. That easily implies mass retributive angry comments.
As for policing against systemic bias in policing, that’s a difficult problem that society struggles with in many different areas because people can be good at excusing their biases. What if one of the generals genuinely makes a comment people disagree with? How can you determine to what extent people’s choice to downvote was due to an unauthorized motivation?
It seems hard to police without acting draconically.
Are you trying to prime people to harass the generals?
Besides, it’s not mass downvoting, it’s just that the increased attention to their accounts revealed a bunch of poorly written comments that people genuinely disagree with and happen to independently decide are worthy of a downvote :)
Genuinely not sure what you are referring to. I think it’s reasonable to be a bit annoyed at generals who get you nuked, but I mean, if someone starts going overboard we will also moderate that.
Well, in that case, it’s not moderation for downvoting, it’s just increased attention from the moderators re-evaluating the degree to which someone is genuinely contributing positively to the site, and happen to independently decide someone is worthy of some moderation warnings :P
You’re suggesting angry comments as an alternative for mass retributive downvoting. That easily implies mass retributive angry comments.
As for policing against systemic bias in policing, that’s a difficult problem that society struggles with in many different areas because people can be good at excusing their biases. What if one of the generals genuinely makes a comment people disagree with? How can you determine to what extent people’s choice to downvote was due to an unauthorized motivation?
It seems hard to police without acting draconically.