Currently, almost anyone in the Fediverse can see Lemmys votes. Lemmy admins can see votes, as well as mods. Only regular Lemmy users can’t. Should the Lemmy devs create a way to make the votes anonymous?

There is a discussion going on right now considering “making the Lemmy votes public” but I think that premisse is just wrong. The votes are public already, they’re just hidden from Lemmy users. Anyone from a kbin/mbin/fedia instance can check out the votes if they are so inclined.

The users right now may fall into a false sense of privacy when voting because the votes are hidden from Lemmy users. If you want to vote something and not show up on the vote list, please create another account to support that type of content and don’t tell anyone.

  • BentiGorlich
    link
    fedilink
    429 days ago

    On mbin users can only see who upvoted a post. An admin can of course still go into the db and look there, but for users and mods there is no way to see who downvoted a post

    • Redjard
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      29 days ago

      There is a “Reduces” tab on mbin, which shows downvotes

        • Redjard
          link
          fedilink
          English
          329 days ago

          Then maybe it is still around on some instances?
          Either way, it is only a matter of time for another fediverse software to show downvotes, or someone to spin up a vote info page which gets its information via undisclosed legitimate fediverse instances so you cannot defederate them.

          • BentiGorlich
            link
            fedilink
            329 days ago

            I was actually the one removing it. I implemented the support for incoming downvotes and because I and others had concerns to keep showing remote users downvotes publicly we / I removed it.

            • Redjard
              link
              fedilink
              English
              229 days ago

              That’s a pretty reasonable compromise, and probably explains my confusion.
              Why didn’t you do the same for remote upvotes?

              • BentiGorlich
                link
                fedilink
                229 days ago

                Upvotes were already implemented when we did the fork. I guess we just never really thought about it. I honestly just have no opinion on whether upvotes should be public or not, so I don’t mind them being public, but I basically never check who upvoted my posts anyway, so might as well be removed… If people care about this I’d say it is just up for discussion…

                • Redjard
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  229 days ago

                  In my case I would like them to be private, but currently they are not. I don’t think it is good to try to hinder the visibility into a fundamentally transparent system.

                  I don’t see a technical way to make votes private either, that doesn’t prevent bad actor instances abusing the vote system. As an admin of an instance I could just add 5-10 votes to all of my interactions whenever I feel like it, and noone would be able to tell it didn’t come from legitimate users on my instance. The accounts of vote origin are needed as proof, hence moderators on lemmy having access to them.

                  Do you perhaps have any idea how this could be accomplished?

                  • BentiGorlich
                    link
                    fedilink
                    229 days ago

                    You cannot make votes completely private, one instance has to have the authority over which votes do exist. This instance should be the origin of a post or comment.

                    At the moment it works like this: you upvote a post, this upvote gets send to the author of said post AND the magazine and that magazine then broadcasts your upvote to all subscribers of said magazine.

                    I could imagine that the process looks a lot different: you upvote a post, this upvote gets send to the author of said post, the author of the post then sends an update to the magazine saying how many people have now upvoted their post and the magazine then broadcasts this info to every subscriber of the magazine.

                    With that you would of course have new limitations concerning moderation and maybe there are trust issues regarding the correct reporting of that upvote count, but only the author of the post (and their instance ofc) could technically know who upvoted their post. As in everything here this is a compromise and whether the gained privacy is worth the other limitations, I don’t know