For this user base it is the right answer. So many petty downvoters. On my site I'm considering a rule that would make it so you can't be the vote that casts a comment into the negative without giving a reason, and then that reason would be turned into a comment. If something is worth downvoting then it is worth explaining why someone is wrong. If you can't do that maybe you shouldn't downvote. I don't think you should have to do that every time. But if a comment is going to go negative someone should step up to the plate and bother to articulate. That way a comment can't get hidden away from the public just because a petty mob that can't even present an argument sees it as convenient if certain information disappears.

So in that case the downvoter who crossed it into the negative would not be anonymous.

[–] PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.uk 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

i think that will end up pushing discourse on your site towards negativity

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 2 points 3 months ago

I believe there is precedent for that. I've seen people from HexBear say that because their instance doesn't have down votes they leave comments to criticize people. I get the appeal of wanting people to justify downvotes but this is a casual internet forum. Nobody is going to do that every single time. I'm more concerned it will lead to more simple negative comments like "this is stupid".