There should be a moderate bar for linkposting, as it takes up one of the frontpage slots. People may be downvoting because they see a link post with no body text as a low-effort post, and thus less likely to reflect consideration of the bar.
I think the bar for linkposts is supposed to the same as it is for original posts, no? At least, that’s how I’ve interpreted guidance published by mods on the subject.
If people are downvoting because they’re assuming a linkpost without a summary is low value then that’s a pity. Summaries are encouraged but they aren’t mandatory.
Or maybe down-voters are following Forum guidance perfectly—they’re downvoting because they don’t think it’s valuable for other Forum users to see prominent people publishing critiques. I disagree with this view, so it would be nice to see a defence of it.
Perhaps it would be valuable to have a ‘quick links’ section where this sort of thing could be shared without taking room from the front page? Or the guidance should advise people like Deborah to post this sort of thing in the quick takes section?
Ultimately, voting is an exercise in judgment by voters applying their own standards. I will say that I’ve seen very short text posts (as opposed to quick takes) get the same treatment.
Where the linkpost is to a video, I think it’s usually low value unless there’s enough information to enable the reader to make their own decision about whether to use their time to view it. I’m a little more forgiving with linkposted text, which can be quickly skimmed.
(Again, I did not vote and can only speculate on why others did)
There should be a moderate bar for linkposting, as it takes up one of the frontpage slots. People may be downvoting because they see a link post with no body text as a low-effort post, and thus less likely to reflect consideration of the bar.
I think the bar for linkposts is supposed to the same as it is for original posts, no? At least, that’s how I’ve interpreted guidance published by mods on the subject.
If people are downvoting because they’re assuming a linkpost without a summary is low value then that’s a pity. Summaries are encouraged but they aren’t mandatory.
Or maybe down-voters are following Forum guidance perfectly—they’re downvoting because they don’t think it’s valuable for other Forum users to see prominent people publishing critiques. I disagree with this view, so it would be nice to see a defence of it.
Perhaps it would be valuable to have a ‘quick links’ section where this sort of thing could be shared without taking room from the front page? Or the guidance should advise people like Deborah to post this sort of thing in the quick takes section?
Ultimately, voting is an exercise in judgment by voters applying their own standards. I will say that I’ve seen very short text posts (as opposed to quick takes) get the same treatment.
Where the linkpost is to a video, I think it’s usually low value unless there’s enough information to enable the reader to make their own decision about whether to use their time to view it. I’m a little more forgiving with linkposted text, which can be quickly skimmed.
(Again, I did not vote and can only speculate on why others did)