Because to me, they seem like de facto "Agree and “Disagree” buttons, whether or not it was the intent.

  • remon
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    18 hours ago

    That would just be misinformation

    Sure, according to us. But you don’t actually need to be right to think you’re right. If someone believes the earth is flat, they’ll downvote “globe-talk” as misinformation, just as it was intended! So it all just comes back to (dis)agreeing.

    • warm@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Of course, but these examples are provably false. Flat earthers have accidentally disproved themselves many times.

      If they are just having a giggle then whatever, but some are serious and that is damaging to the legitimacy of science, which is a dangerous path.

      If the poster is open to discussion, perhaps some chat could make them reconsider their position. So I wouldnt necessarily downvote. Context is important, so I still wont just use it as a disagree button.

      • remon
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        18 hours ago

        I know and I chose those two examples to illustrate that people will even disagree with stuff that is blatantly factual. So it just gets worse if you enter murkier territory, like politics or ethics where there is no firm factual basis.

        I’m sure you won’t have to search too long for a very well written post by some tanky about how a North Korean style dictatorship is superior to western democracy. Should you upvote it just because it’s well written, even if you think the idology is insane and dangerous?