For a reason.
In all projects where voting exists, you would ruin it with “downvotes”.
If someone does not like a topic, he just do not vote there and leave his vote somewhere else.
Combined with a limited amount of votes available, this is quite smart
Voting is always good, but how do you know a ratio without a down vote. Most people don’t see all posts, so unless you can tell how many people view a vote you can’t tell if only 1 person likes it, or if only one person saw it.
With a search + scrolling, you reach what you want to reach.
The spirit of voting is to vote for something what you are interested in.
Downvotes ruined the internet / new generation of humans in the internet imo.
A downvote is most likely involved with someone bored or personal conflict over someones opinion.
Simply put: downvoting someone is toxic.
It like running over someones mouth in real life which is not a gentle move.
The ratio is achieved by pure interest, which is free of negativity.
Believe, that the author better themes should be awarded, as least, a paid-for ship. This will boost stimulation new proposals, and means will make server better, think this a small the price for bright future
One thing I missed out on in my first post was - where did this totalitarian voting system come from? It is not a voting system if there is only one option to choose from. Russia had that system, and China still does where you can only vote for the communist party because there is no other option - hardly democratic giving us no option to vote no. Nor is it democratic to ridicule or insult those that have a differing opinion from you. I refer to comments like the following -
I have played a long time (10600+ hours) and have seen huge changes, a lot of which were good, but constantly nerfing stuff because some have poor attention spans and become bored is pandering to the lowest common denominator.
If you can only vote for a proposal, how on earth do you know how many people are not for the proposal? I am well aware of the possible problems with misuse of the internet by trolls, but surely this draconian reaction to it is equally as immoral at the other extreme end of the scale - a few individuals dictating the demise of the democratic process. So at the moment the OCD nerf proposal will go through on a vote of 5 ‘yes’ and 0 ‘no’, because the ‘no’ voters aren’t allowed to vote - very democratic, and a very slippery slope to embark upon.
I think thats a big mistake Rexx. By excluding down votes your censoring those who don’t agree with your proposal. That smells of tyranny. Your essentially saying “you can only vote if you agree with me.” What nonsense is that? Just because someone disagrees with you doesn’t mean they shouldn’t have a right to vote no, no matter how you personally feel about it.
For example, i want you to vote for A because i just like A and it brings positive feelings because of the fact that i like A, then someone disagrees with me because they like B and to them B makes them feel positive, but to me sense i like A and voting for A makes me feel positive you voting for B makes me feel negative because you disagree with me. You see?
All of this “if you disagree with me makes me feel negative” is a very clear attempt at censoring disagreeing votes. Which that in itself makes the current voting system invalid. The current voting system has lost its value as an equal and fair voting platform.