To explain my disagree-vote: I think such a system would necessarily create a strong bias against downvotes/disagree-votes, since most people would just not downvote rather than making a justifying comment. “Beware trivial inconveniences”
I wish there were more of a norm around it, but I wouldn’t want the site to enforce it. Even without details, downvotes are a much better signal than lack of upvotes that the post/comment is unwanted, at least by people who care enough to vote.
I would like to remove, or at least limit, STRONG votes in either direction. This post is currently at −20, but only has 6 votes.
Agnostic on the argument itself, but I really feel LessWrong would be improved if down-voting required a justifying comment.
To explain my disagree-vote: I think such a system would necessarily create a strong bias against downvotes/disagree-votes, since most people would just not downvote rather than making a justifying comment. “Beware trivial inconveniences”
I wish there were more of a norm around it, but I wouldn’t want the site to enforce it. Even without details, downvotes are a much better signal than lack of upvotes that the post/comment is unwanted, at least by people who care enough to vote.
I would like to remove, or at least limit, STRONG votes in either direction. This post is currently at −20, but only has 6 votes.