You can see who upvoted and downvoted a post by viewing it in friendica.
-
It's way easier to notice and defed when you can see these fake usernames
-
this is an icky issue because lemmy sends votes with empty addressing, so remote instances should count them but not show them to anyone. however mastodon (and *key) sends likes with empty addressing too, but considers them public. lemmy is (surprisingly) right here and should request that the rest of fedi respects the protocol and hides stuff based on its addressing. maybe open issues on mastodon and friendica
also this issue probably exists when seeing lemmy posts on any microblogging instance
-
You are NOT supposed to downvote things that "aren't really interesting", you are actively ruining other people's user experience on here by doing that as downvoted posts get less visibility.
-
Which is a problem
-
There are plenty of ways to handle double voting without plaintext user strings. The fact that it's done this way is just lazy and poor design and doesn't actually so anything to prevent a rogue instance from vote spamming with fake users.
-
That is stupid and defeats the point and makes me rethink my decision to support piefed.
-
But it also has to be defended separately by the admin of every server that has a user subbed to that community. Seems like a large burden to put on small-mid instance admins.
I'd be surprised if my server admin was really paying attention that closely to votes on communities I'm subbed to, right?
I have to admit I don't know the view that admins get of how their server intersects the fediverse. -
I don't think everybody knows that and at least here on Lemmy, it doesn't show it by default like friendica. The fediverse doesn't necessarily mean that all data has to be public. It's just that it's way harder to have a sense of truth without public data.
-
This is nothing new. Fire up any ActivityPub server and you can see everything over the wire. As a Lemmy admin of my server of just me, I can also see it in the UI.
-
I know, but some people assume votes are private.
-
Every thread will get downvoted by someone for some reason. You would go insane trying to make sense of it.
-
Well yes, the visibility thing would be the point. Interesting and relevant content is upvoted, becoming more visible to more people, and uninteresting and irrelevant content is downvoted, becoming less visible and shown to fewer people.
-
I get this is obviously intended behaviour on part of actpub but I'd love for there to be a pseudo-anonymous voting system too. Maybe an option to hash user credentials when added to likes to ensure that they're unique whilst obfuscating the original user.
-
Your interests are not identical with interests of other people.
-
I think the issue is that many Lemmy users will think more carefully about what they comment than what they up/downvote, as a comment appears connected to your username but a vote doesn't. You might decide against commenting on something you disagree with because you don't want to get in a fight, instead just downvoting it, but if people then know if was you who downvoted can still pick the fight.
Basically the issue is you're revealing a lot more information than you might initially have realised if you'd have known votes were public all along. Maybe a disgruntled person uses that to dox you, or maybe a corpo feeds all that information into their fancy computer system to work out who you might be, who knows.
-
If you'd only ever interacted with Lemmy and not read up on how ActivityPub works then that's a reasonable assumption, it's not like anything (that I've noticed!) actually tells you that your votes are public, and they don't look to be public in the places you're likely to see!
-
Any instance admin can see the vote history.
-
Lemmy likes aren't meant to be public, this is just other software failing to respect the privacy Lemmy indicates.
-
Some people might think it's not interesting because it's not appropriate content for that community, and that by downvoting they are improving the quality for everyone. I don't think every instance/community has a unified consensus on how exactly to use voting, and some people are always going to do their own thing regardless.
-
Oh. If the only thing stopping the votes being public is a label saying pretty please don't make this public then it does seem very open to abuse.
