

I mean both in reddit and lemmy the concept of downvotes was never meant to be a “agree” or “disagree”, even “like or dislike”. It’s meant to be a “good for discussion” vs “hinderance of discussion”. AKA lets say we’re discussing linux distributions, I come across this.
Person A: I like linux mint, it’s much easier to install, I like the defaults and my printer just works with no setup.
Person B: “Linux mint is for noobs, arch ftw”
Within that, as I am personally a die hard fan of archlinux, so in the agree vs disagree system, I should downvote A and upvote B.
But in a discussion based voting, I’d perhaps respond to A with my pro’s or cons of arch (though in this situation probably agree if the user in question sounds to be a newer user, though I may still make a case for possibly the pro’s of using arch even as a starting distro.
Meanwhile person B, is hostile, gives zero details for WHY anyone should use arch, does absolutely nothing to open discussion or actually help anyone make an informed decision.






from what I’ve seen yes, at least in spectrum’s case they basically give you ad subsudised for free, and for something like 8.99 you can upgrade that to ad free. I think most give that option.