Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

1.1K

We are allowing accounts above level 6 to look at which accounts vote on posts and how they vote. Our intention with this feature is to provide greater transparency on the site. We want to provide as much transparency as possible on poal. However allowing brand new accounts that haven't participated access to this feature would probably be abused. We may adjust the level in the future. However for now this is a test case to see how it helps with the brigading problems we have had over the past few weeks.

Someone noticing they are constantly getting downvoted by same accounts can report them to admins' PM, in which case we will review the situation and act accordingly, and as usual, those actions will be documented in and the site logs.

Thanks to for all his hard work on poal.co

Sincerely Boobs2.

EDIT: We have modified the feature to just show downvoters account names. After discussing it at length with the community this seems like a better option.

We are allowing accounts above level 6 to look at which accounts vote on posts and how they vote. Our intention with this feature is to provide greater transparency on the site. We want to provide as much transparency as possible on poal. However allowing brand new accounts that haven't participated access to this feature would probably be abused. We may adjust the level in the future. However for now this is a test case to see how it helps with the brigading problems we have had over the past few weeks. Someone noticing they are constantly getting downvoted by same accounts can report them to admins' PM, in which case we will review the situation and act accordingly, and as usual, those actions will be documented in /s/sitebans and the site logs. Thanks to @AOU for all his hard work on poal.co Sincerely Boobs2. EDIT: We have modified the feature to just show downvoters account names. After discussing it at length with the community this seems like a better option.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (48).
[–] • 3 pts

Why not? I am genuinely curious what your opinion is.

[–] [deleted] • 8 pts

People won't vote honestly when their username is attached to the vote. When the site becomes bigger it gives ammunition for witch hunts.

I don't mind that the admins can see everything cause they have to be able to audit things, but I just don't see the point when it comes to the average user. I definitely don't want to know how other users voted, I have no reason to.

[–] • 2 pts

I think in for the most part people won't be dissuaded from upvoteing, but they will be more hesitant to downvote. The reason I think this could be a good thing is downvotes should be used sparingly and for spam, this makes the downvote button more like a report spam button without completely negating its use.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

I can see the use for sure, but I think it could easily be used for the wrong reasons. Imagine this feature through a malicious person's point of view, it will definitely be abused. Like I said, now it may be fine with this particular group of users, but as you grow I bet this will start to cause problems between users. Its good to see you guys are trying to fix the problems regardless.

[–] • 0 pt

I understand your concern.

I also believe words are more important than a silent vote.

[–] [deleted] • 3 pts

Couldn't you argue that a silent vote is speech as well? I think they both serve an important purpose, and more people lurk and vote then comment. And this would coerce how they would vote.

Couldn't you implement a threshold where if a person down votes someone else so many times in a short period of time then admins get notified? That way you can look and see if it's spam or brigading. Realistically you guys are the final word anyway so you'd have to wade through complaints in the current system regardless.

I don't know I just think there's a better answer personally. Although I appreciate you guys are actually trying to find solutions.

[–] • 6 pts

This is a very long video, but it’s one of the better argumentations for secret ballots that I’ve seen:

https://youtube.com/watch?v=1gEz__sMVaY

But as a more simple example, this kills poals for porn, maybe that’s intentional but something to consider.

If you are worried about repeat brigadiers maybe show a hashed (with secret salt) version of the username.

[–] • 2 pts

Thanks I will check it out.

[–] • 1 pt

The change in approach to only show down voters is a great idea all around. Love it.

[–] • 1 pt

So I watched the video and formulated at what I would say has to be a consideration in a system like poal.I would say it at least should be a consideration in most scenarios what you have a secret ballot system, each person in theory only has a single voat. The nature of having anonymous users means each user in effect can have unlimited votes. That was the nature of the problem we were having. In a normal voting system where each person is accountable for their vote, secret ballot protects them. I don't think the same translates here. Here having a secret ballot system allows the same person to vote multiple times on the same system and even sell those votes should they be so inclined. Hence the manipulation you have on reddit and voat, I believe this new system that makes users accountable for their downvotes serves 2 functions, 1 it forces people to think before downvoting and makes it much harder to use the downvote button as an I disagree button or an I don't like you button, and 2 forces people who would suppress content to be accountable for it.

[–] • 0 pt

Yeah those are fair considerations.

I really like the solution you arrived at, it leverages the downsides of the original approach you described to an upside.

Transparent voting makes people less likely to vote esp on controversial content.

Discouraging downvotes is generally a good thing.

On nab, the current approach to voting all follows from the goal of a lack of central authority. This compounds the anonymity issue you describe. But in my system, voting multiple times is a natural consequence of the approach and not taboo which I think should help equalize the effects some what, and voting power is strongly limited.

My hope is that people will eventually come to realize they are better off focusing their energies on their own contributions rather than silencing others through downvotes.

But another interesting consequence of being distributed is that any peer could ignore the existing vote structure and do their own thing, even if it requires central authority and secrecy.