... if you post downvotable stuff. Maybe post less crap and more high quality thoughtful content?

throw1234567891 3 hours ago | parent [-]

The problem isn’t low quality content, that gets filtered out mostly before it reaches the front page. The problem are people who downvote based on emotional trigger, not argument. And people ganging up. Never had a case where suddenly within a minute you get 4, 5 downvotes? Seems like an organised group.

▲

NewsaHackO 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

That seems more like a conspiracy theory. I think the group of people who 1) view this website and 2) click on a thread about certain topics are a heavily conditioned (and therefore more homogenized) group; if you say something that is controversial/low quality, it is likely going to get downvoted by multiple people in that group.

	▲	rustystump 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Controversial/low quality are both subjective and i am not a fan of putting controversial next to low quality. I do agree I dont think there is any larger bias other than a homogeneous group but it does question if such a group will up/down vote similar homogeneous content producing overall lower quality discussion and content.

▲

hamburglar an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> Never had a case where suddenly within a minute you get 4, 5 downvotes?

Well, no, I never have, but if I did, my first reaction would be to think I struck a nerve and had a bunch of people react, not that there was a conspiracy.