I believe that spam is really disruptive and makes any environment dirty, but any content that someone downzaps should be filtered, and the moderators should make the final decision. I've met about 3 jerks here who downzapped out of pure harassment.

I hear you. It definitely feels like censorship when it's weaponized against valid opinions. That's the dark side of the tool.

But without it, spam and bots would drown the platform completely. It's a trade-off between free speech and noise control.

I'm trying to see it as part of the game now. If the content is strong, it survives. If not, it fades.

Do you think there's a better way to moderate without central admins?

milad

To me, Downzaps is censorship; it's people who have no arguments and simply use Downzaps to censor content.