I think this is a really good suggestion from the other thread:

I'd wish people would be man/women enough to always tell why they voted down, random punishment does not help or lead to anything.

Why not implement a mandatory "reason" field that has to be filled in for any down-vote?

I've seen it in other forums (that one had it for +rep too, which is nice but not as needed.)

I think it would be very good both for less "downvotes out of spite" and for making the intent more clear to the receiver.

but since you cannot delete a post..

The site runs a modified IP.Board installation. I think that means you are right, unless there's some other software/company out there that has "vision" in the name. It is quite possible the worst forum software I've ever seen.

I feel there are really 3 types of people in Gamedev:

1 - Those that will just get upvotes (yayz)

2 - Those that will only get downvotes (and quickly disappear, rightfully so, for being trolls, bots, etc.)

3 - Those that get mixed votes, often starting with a few downvotes, but quickly moving towards a positive count. A lot of people that are active now art part of that group I believe. It takes a few down votes to `fit in` not in that you need to agree with everyone else, but it teaches everyone how to behave as a microcosm. I'm pretty sure 90-99% of my downvotes were warranted, and I hope I've grown as a person from them. I don't think I'm immune to downvotes, etc.

That being said, I've seen very "partisan" threads where the OP was not a stellar community member and decided to downvote people who disagreed with his approach. It happened to me as well. That didn't stop me from getting above 10k rep though (many thanks to my articles, I agree, but still).

In the greater scheme of things, these random downvotes pale in comparison to your contribution, and if you stick around long enough, your rep will go up. I know I've already upvoted you 2-3 times myself :P

I would in fact go so far as to suggest that the whole forum system needs a visual overhaul that would minimize the empty/buttoned space between posts and increase the amount of posts visible in one page. Compress the discussion to semi-IRC level to increase context readability, yet allow to express freely (in terms of size) and edit posts to improve them.

This was one of my concerns when we moved off the old system back in 2010. I even wrote up some CSS to remove a bunch of space, but don't know if that old link even works any more. Either way, some reading and an older CSS custom sheet.

Back when the transition first took place, the first few rounds of site styles let you see one long post, or perhaps 1.5 shorter posts. The style has been improved since then, but it is nowhere near as dense as the old forum (look at the bottom of this page for some screen shots) my favorite was the compact discussion text of the 3.x series. The v4 version had three bars between each comment.

The current site (v5, I guess) has a bar, then tagline, then a bar, then the quote buttons, then some bars, then a header bar, then some post info spread between two bars, then some white space, and finally the next comment. Even after four years the bad text density of the default site still bugs me.

I strongly suggest you make your own style sheet if your browser supports it, and if not, get a style sheet modifying plugin. Feel free to use some the one linked to above to start with. I would give an update, but I've modified it over time to hide other elements. I don't want to get in trouble for revealing what all is modified, hidden or replaced. My own personal CSS for the site may or may not have ads or moderator-visible controls hidden by default.

But that is a separate conversation beyond downvoting and motivation.

the problem with stackoverflow isnt the voting sys, its the point sys. the nazis there are desperate to do anything that will give points, like closing threads or mark as ambiguous or any shit, bringing the ridiculous situation of closed topics being high voted etc.

IMO, you shouldnt care about the votes or points, whats the reason you replying to a thread? show off? or trying to share/gain some knowledge?

I dont answer to gamedev much cause theres an army of ppl way more present here that knows way more than me, but when I feel I can add something I just do it without giving the slightest shit.

If I get downvoted, I want to know why, which means I will learn something that Im doing wrong. If it happens that I feel a bunch of retards are wrong and I am right I dont care about engaging an argue till I call everyones moms of names and get possibly banned u_u** bitches. I will either learn or they will.

Personally I find the voting system here relatively positive. I agree that a mandatory downvote reason would be nice, because often it's the feeling of confusion over why you're being downvoted that annoys people. Also a reason can be disputed, whereas a raw downvote cannot. I have experienced spite downvotes, but it was very rare and taken care of by moderators. It may also be useful if a post could be flagged as no voting, for example ones likely to spark language wars. Overall though not everything needs a technological solution, I appreciate the hard work of everybody who works on the board.