Removing downvoting feels intuitively wrong to me (eg, I believe that dissent is a really important part of a healthy democracy). If all those mega-corp platforms are removing downvoting, then I'm pretty confident my intuition on this matter is correct
The voting will stay but your homepage will be a for you page that selects posts based on your usage data and whatever is trending instead of the votes, in an attempt to bring engagement to a maximum. Just like what's been happening to Instagram for years.
And it happened right when it became apparent that we were living in the Disinformation Age and every bit of power to flag bullshit content became that much more important.
Beehaw does the same. I'm not sure if that's been the case in our instance. I don't inherently disagree, but I'm not 100% sold either.
If there's a clearly bad/misinformed/rude take, they simply don't get voted on. They rarely have more than the single 1 vote of their terrible opinion/sharing.
It's common to see +10 to +30 on a positive comment, with the comment it's responding to at 1.
I don't disagree that it could be a bad thing, but I think it's about the community and its practice surrounding it as well. So far in my experience on the instance I participate in I've seen it be effective.
Also I'm not sure if this is a thing on Lemmy but on reddit there were downvote farmers. Downvoting could also actually encourage people to perform these terrible comments to accumulate as many downvotes as they can. Downvoting disabled removed this problem in its entirety. Reddit has this issue long before some of its other problems and it has only grown since, up til I left. I don't know what the state of it is now, and I'm not sure how big of an issue it even is on Lemmy. It comes down to finding the line between what is preferable.
All in all, I think there are good and bad things about not having a downvote. I do think downvote disabled helps some aspects (engagement, active/trending posts) but it could also negatively influence federated content (spam, bad actors). I don't think a comment being at -30 is any more telling than the same comment at 1 when it's surrounded by +30 upvoted comments. However, if someone actively sought out getting downvoted, that can no longer exist.
IMO trading having bad comments be visibly negative in order to prevent the downvote farmers is a reasonable exchange
Hexbear.net (spun off from r/chapotraphouse, banned on Reddit in 2019 for fascist propaganda), has downvotes disabled on their entire instance, so that's one. Please note that though they claim to be "leftist," their users' primary focus is spreading right wing propaganda via strawman and red herring tactics, usually in swarms.
It's also something I've pointed out in the past that netted me bans on other instances (not just the community but the whole instance)
My instance has down votes disabled as well and it's something that has made me want to switch instances at times. Not to mention the admin really wanting to federate with Hexbear which is absolutely not popular with the users on the instance.
Can you point me at the right wing propaganda on hexbear? Someone elsewhere in this thread said blahaj has downvotes disabled so that might be two.
It’s interesting to me that hexbear disabled downvotes because of downvoting campaigns against lgbt users, cultivated a culture of replying instead, federated with blahaj, broke with blahaj and now blahaj ostensibly removed downvotes.
They were actually banned from reddit for posting “John Brown was right” memes implying that the radical abolitionist was correct to kill slaveowners. They can be excessive and annoying but they’re certainly not fascists.