Stoned_Ape

They can't help themselves from inventing ever more things that are now Putins fault.

One could consider to stop drinking coffee. Coffee itself has a rather large environmental impact as it is. Or drink it without milk-like substances.

Alright, you don't want to talk about it. So please do stop. You repeating already answered questions doesn't do anyone any good.

I'm sorry, but I think you are avoiding to talk about the merits of such a system based on the fact that you can't dictate how users use a system. Your solution is to simply stop caring about it, my solution would be to encourage the correct usage of the system and educate everyone about it.

You argue for a good system, while at the same time you argue that no system can be good, because you can't dictate anyone, and there are bots.

So... why even talk about this, if there is no reason for you that any of this makes sense?

How do you dictate how people use preference buttons?

Why do you want to dictate it?

They’re going to use them however they see fit, and that’s a good thing.

If that's a good thing is the very thing we argue about right now. I disagree that this is a good thing. Especially if you mean that everybody should any system however they like, instead of how it is supposed to be used. If everyone uses any system differently, be it a 5 star system, or upvotes/downvotes, the system is not going to show what people think it shows, but a mix of all interpretations mangled into a number.

If half of the people use "3 stars" for an average product, but the other half uses "5 stars" for an average product, the rating is off for both halfs. It's the same with rating the delivery. If the rating system is meant for the product only, using it for other reasons distorts the result of that system.

I hope you can see what I mean.

And how do you find good content without some sort of collective preference?

As I said elsewhere in this thread: By having a metric that shows how well written and thought through an argument is. You don't have to "like" what is written or said, but you can acknowledge the quality of the argument.

what’s the best way to sort them so that users don’t have to read every comment?

Depends on what your goal is: Do you want users to read what they LIKE to read? Then you go for likes/dislikes, so what people want to read most is always at the top, creating a filter bubble, also called an echo chamber.

If you want to encourage quality discussion, where arguments are higher rated than emotional replies, then you should not do that.

That's not at all what I'm talking about. I argue that using votes as "likes", instead of how the Reddiquette originally meant it, is a bad idea for the very reason you are stating. Sorting by popularity is not going to highlight the best solution or argument, but the most popular one.

So you think that popularity equals quality?

to find something decent.

What does decent mean? Something popular? Or something with quality content and comments?

It’s just imaginary internet points, relax.

Honest question: Then why are we having these points? If they are of no actual use, and nobody should care about them, why are they implemented? For what reason?

Yeah. What about Asssange for example?