Friend [@Arak](/user/profile/Arak) This information is useful to newcomers. I want to share my opinion which is not include in your comment I think that human error : dissent , misunderstandings , misuse of buttons without knowing it. Terms and conditions : In relevant community I saw more than either two comments or posts treat as downvoting/spam.

Thanks for your thoughts [@arak](/user/profile/arak) and I mostly agree with them. You're right that we tend to focus on upvotes and only really downvote when its clearly inappropriate such as spam/rudeness/crappy airdrops etc, but we could be downvoting more things like you have mentioned. I'm not a big fan of TA/price prediction and charts on the feed either as blindly following someone elses' calls is never a good idea but I don't downvote them as I know some people do like to read these things. Speculation rarely offers many learning opportunities either and at the end of the day it's a bit like reading the tealeaves! Saying this, there have been a couple of really good FA/TA articles that have been Relevant, but yes unless they are exceptional or offer some learning we could probably start downvoting them more. The crypto feed has always been for learning about developments in the space and not speculation, but "number go up" is still a big part of crypto for most people so I'm not sure about making those type of articles a "hard no" for the feed. If they stat clogging up the feed or providing too much noise then we can always act upon this. Yes a sponsored post is rarely (if ever) likely to get Relevant and I would prefer a different source for information on that project. I agree this would be a good area to tighten up with downvoting. When it appears someone has accidentally posted to the wrong feed I downvote it and leave a comment on why downvoted and signpost them to the correct feed. One of the most important things when downvoting is to let the person know why you have downvoted if you can. Yes all feeds content should be in English for now. People should not be posting support questions anywhere else but on the Support feed. As long as their not a newbie then I think a downvote is fair in that situation. Overall these communities haven't really built on any hard/concrete rules and they have sort of evolved their own standards. It's really wonderful to see. Ultimately they are your communities to help shape, manage and find benefit from and we'll see many different communities with different rules/standards as Relevant grows. Maybe we'll see a TA/FA feed one day for all us degens out there as I do love a good chart...just not in the crypto feed lol!.

Downvoting is indeed a major aspect of Relevant which has been of concern to many, as I have read interesting topics/discussions and funny ones too, about it. I've read posts where people suggested that reasons should be demanded from a person who is downvoting before the downvote will go through. What I have learnt, which I strongly believe too, is that different people have different reasons and everyone has a right to theirs. By implication, all the reasons you stated above are valid, and even more. If everyone is allowed to downvote whatever they feel like downvoting for whatever reason, even if they are wrong reasons, then there is a serious concern. People could downvote for shear hatred. And that is why the concept of Reputation comes in - people whose opinion align with the objective of a community are admins of each community and they have high reputations. These admins observe contributions of other community members and upvote comments that rightly represent the interest of the community, thereby increasing the reputation of such members who make such comments. Then there will be admins and high reputation members who, to a greater degree, without bias represent the interest of the community. So if someone has a wrong reason, he/she will probably not rise in reputation and a downvote from such will have little or no effect. I have seen believes/religions/interests play a role in people's downvoting decisions too. Posts about LGBT+ and laws around them make news and fit into News Feed community but some people find such offensive. There was once a post around that and someone commented with a contrary opinion based on his/her believe, the comment was downvoted. It is an aspect that cannot be wholly summed up, but if you ask me, I'd say a good check has been put in place.

[@Druss](/user/profile/Druss) [@joefun90](/user/profile/joefun90) What you said opens the door for a few discussion points, here are my thoughts, plus I totally forgot one aspect I wanted to talk about I will add at the end. Quality content : typically when talking about TA posts what I find not relevant and 'downvotable' are posts that are low-quality TA like a market recaps from CoinTelegraph or some post that is super basic saying 'this crypto is at support' or whatever. On the other hand, like you said, there are some article that are more profound analysis using on-chain metric for example to give an in-depth analysis that can also contain TA but are something more than simply stating a few lines on support/resistance. In the end, it is about quality. Values: Relevant communities by their nature are an expression of collective values, which is awesome. That is why it is important to express discontent (downvote) as well as agreement/judgement about utility (upvote) on posts/comments that contain a value-judgement about something (the example used in Christlik's comment about LGBT post). This is how a preference in terms of values is expressed, we should cultivate that. In the end, especially in the news section or alt-woke, relevance is about beliefs and values which is not neutral and this is a good thing. Repetitive/low effort posts: this point I've been thinking about for a while now. Sometimes a news comes up and we see posts being shared from every possible source on the exact same topic, sometimes with the exact same title. This bothers me because it shows that some users don't really look at the feed and keep sharing the same info which adds nothing to the feed and dilute the feed. I am leaning towards downvoting here when the exact same news has been shared multiple times and new posts emerge adding 0 value to the feed. This might be a little harsh, what do you think? Ultimately it is an incentive for community members to actually read the feed and share posts that bring value to the feed, the point is to actively curate not just mindlessly share posts right? I am especially thinking when 1 post about a subject has gained substantial traction (maybe a dozen upvotes, a couple of thousand Rel staked) which shows that the community has seen the news in question therefore there is no more need to keep posting links on the subject unless the add something. The last point is important because when there are 10 posts on the same subject the problem is that we won't see the 1 that adds something because of dilution.