2

We have clearly established that Ripple questions and other cryptocurrencies questions are in-topic, but there still are users that downvote and close-vote all such questions.

I'm getting really really annoyed.

This is an abusive behaviour and those users should get banned from the site.

I really can't see how can you tolerate that.

4

Regardless of what we, the moderators, have commanded from on high StackExchange sites are designed to be a self-regulating community (more or less). While I don't agree with the idea of downvoting Ripple and altcoin questions and that's certainly not what the votes are there for, we Bitcoiners of all people should understand and respect the workings of a free market.

The original rules are arrived at by voting consensus, modifications to the rules are arrived at by voting consensus and the community-evaluated worth of individual content is arrived at by voting consensus. If more people here like ripple than hate it, you'll still end up with a positive score. If not, questions the community deems undesirable will go into the red and eventually stop being asked. Welcome to StackExchange, the ultimate free market of Q&A.

  • Still, this is bugged. As long as ripple-hating people reach 5, they can close questions, because reopen votes cannot be cast until they are closed. Also, early downvotes might bring less attention to the question, and this is unfair. This shouldn't be an acceptable behaviour. – o0'. Apr 27 '13 at 19:32
  • 1
    And as long as there are more ripple-loving people they can re-open said closed questions. As long as there are fair admins, questions that get closed and re-opened or become an issue of dispute can be locked. Voting is anonymous and only works properly when it remains anonymous. There are a lot of things we'll do to reduce user stress on this site, but betraying the entire concept of user privacy isn't one of them. – David Perry Apr 27 '13 at 19:38
  • 1
    In short, be patient. Either you'll win and the ripple haters will leave (or at least stop downvoting since it does no good) or you'll lose and the ripple lovers will leave. Again, self-regulating via market effects, exactly the sort of thing the majority of Bitcoiners would love. – David Perry Apr 27 '13 at 19:39
  • "Voting only works if anonymous" is a totally false assumption. Self-regulating makes sense in some situations, but abuses should be prevented and sanctioned anyway. Never mind, I give up, thanks for trying to make your point. – o0'. Apr 29 '13 at 8:44
  • 1
    Whether you agree with the assumption or not, it's the way StackExchange works and it's a pretty high-functioning model that's done quite well for us thus far. Sorry if it upsets you, but sometimes the only answer is "that's the way it is and it's unlikely to change." – David Perry Apr 29 '13 at 14:27
  • Why do we have shady bots that remove serial downvotes targetting a user, and this is considered good, while the same doesn't apply if the target is a tag? It's pretty much the same principle: you should vote the question, not the person nor the tag. – o0'. Apr 29 '13 at 18:38
  • StackExchange indeed has far from perfect voting system. However, on many other SE forums professionalism prevails because it is in everybody's best interest to get the best (or any) answers to their questions. Thus, often very superficial attempts at answers don't get downvoted, as any effort counts. Here, with the motley crew of spammers, scammers, extremely opinionated, wannabe advertisers, wannabe whatever, special interests, etc. the system weaknesses are much more obvious. One can say it is just another example of the tragedy of the commons. – Bitripple May 1 '13 at 1:18
  • 3
    Look, I'm getting tired of going around in circles. The moderators and most of the community are on your side in this - one of the mods is actually a Ripple dev, I don't know how much more "on your side" we can get than that. That said, this is the way StackExchange works. It's an existing network that we're a part of - on their terms and following their rules. We're playing in their sandbox and if you don't like their rules you don't have to stay. I'll mourn the loss but they're not going to completely change the rules because you're annoyed by downvotes. They're just downvotes, chill. – David Perry May 1 '13 at 5:35

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .