I believe it is very useful to look at voting through both frameworks, and agree that this is an important aspect to look at. Thanks for deciding to write your concerns in this post.
Downvoting through the lens of stictly ‘wanting to see more/less of something’, to me, makes it hard to differentiate a response between the functional aspect of writing, and the emotional.
Many a post would be much more fulfilling for the posters with differing levels of emotional concerns, if they were accurately and feeling-y addressed—preferably maybe even before posting.
I have tried to write things earlier, that got heavily down-voted, and I left LW for a good while. Mostly because what I wrote was on the Feeling-channel. As such, I primarily wanted an emotional understanding response, and in my naivety I believed that it was obvious. There were vulnerable emotions there, which were never addressed. Of course, I could have been more explicit about my values/needs—but the natural prerequisite for that would be ‘trust’. And from my limited experience, asking for feelingy-things is more risky here, because it, weirdly enough, seems to indicate that what you have written is less than what it could be if you would simply answer ‘neutrally’. Which is true, in a way. If someone were to give me the sought after feeling-y channel feedback, I would be less reactive about the votes.
Your frustration could point to many things, but since the feelings are important—responses to the content alone might totally miss the high value to you when getting a fulfilling response there. And maybe it would allow to to write some things in your posts that is not clear.
I imagine that the format on the recent dialogue-post by habryka and kave, serves to me as a much better example as to how useful it can be to get feedback on the more value-based, personal side of things. In my experience it greatly increase any odds of me being more creative, engaged, content and collected about something.
I mean, I would feel more content and happy about a site that encouraged and help facillitate interactions like those. A simple—I need ‘emotional feedback’ button you could press, to see if maybe there was something very important you were missing.
Still, emotional feedback is also a bit more personal—and so you would have to have trust that your respondent was adequately skilled and trustworthy, to be able to handle it.
If you could improve a post, or maybe find the courage and willingness to write something through the support and help of peers—wouldn’t it be kind of nice? Especially if it was easy to do. I have some ideas here, but not sure if I should elaborate here.
Hello Adam Zerner,
I believe it is very useful to look at voting through both frameworks, and agree that this is an important aspect to look at. Thanks for deciding to write your concerns in this post.
Downvoting through the lens of stictly ‘wanting to see more/less of something’, to me, makes it hard to differentiate a response between the functional aspect of writing, and the emotional. Many a post would be much more fulfilling for the posters with differing levels of emotional concerns, if they were accurately and feeling-y addressed—preferably maybe even before posting.
I have tried to write things earlier, that got heavily down-voted, and I left LW for a good while. Mostly because what I wrote was on the Feeling-channel. As such, I primarily wanted an emotional understanding response, and in my naivety I believed that it was obvious. There were vulnerable emotions there, which were never addressed. Of course, I could have been more explicit about my values/needs—but the natural prerequisite for that would be ‘trust’. And from my limited experience, asking for feelingy-things is more risky here, because it, weirdly enough, seems to indicate that what you have written is less than what it could be if you would simply answer ‘neutrally’. Which is true, in a way. If someone were to give me the sought after feeling-y channel feedback, I would be less reactive about the votes.
Your frustration could point to many things, but since the feelings are important—responses to the content alone might totally miss the high value to you when getting a fulfilling response there. And maybe it would allow to to write some things in your posts that is not clear.
I imagine that the format on the recent dialogue-post by habryka and kave, serves to me as a much better example as to how useful it can be to get feedback on the more value-based, personal side of things. In my experience it greatly increase any odds of me being more creative, engaged, content and collected about something.
I mean, I would feel more content and happy about a site that encouraged and help facillitate interactions like those. A simple—I need ‘emotional feedback’ button you could press, to see if maybe there was something very important you were missing. Still, emotional feedback is also a bit more personal—and so you would have to have trust that your respondent was adequately skilled and trustworthy, to be able to handle it.
If you could improve a post, or maybe find the courage and willingness to write something through the support and help of peers—wouldn’t it be kind of nice? Especially if it was easy to do. I have some ideas here, but not sure if I should elaborate here.
Kindly, Caerulea-Lawrence