• snooggums@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    1 month ago

    If later text shows that my initial reading was incorrect due to missing context or because I misread their starting point, yeah. For example, if something starts off sounding positive but context shows it is actually a dogwhistle I had not come across before I will go back and correct my votes. It rarely takes even a minute to fix a dozen or so in a chain.

    It isn’t so much that I think my individual votes matter, but because I don’t like knowing I gave a positive interactions with that thing.

    Same thing if I read something as a negative and find out I was wrong, gonna flip those to upvotes!

    • tisktisk@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      If context is really needed to identify something as a dogwhistle, isn’t it already an ineffective utility? I’m not doubting you at all–I know next to nothing about any honest dogwhistles, but I’m always curious to know how people avoid the feeling that of paranoia in these instances–how can you be positive you aren’t just yielding to a fear of some sort?

      • snooggums@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 month ago

        Dogwhistles are for the in group to show solidarity. Those outside not recognizing the dogwhistle or having a hard time proving it is a dogwhistle is the entire purpose.

  • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 month ago

    Sometimes. I might get halfway through the comments and see that someone has shared something from their post history that paints them in a different light.

    • kbal@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 month ago

      brb I’m just going to take a few minutes to go through my records and see if any of my recent upvotes need revising in light of your latest comment.

  • deegeese@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Rarely.

    Most likely reason is to upvote a contrarian reply to my own comment that I was too salty about to upvote in the moment.

    I already have a pretty good sense of bad faith arguments, having been online for far too long.

  • Arkouda@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    No because when I upvote someone it usually means I agree with their point. Disagreeing later doesn’t change the initial agreement.

      • Arkouda@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        If I agree with their point, again, I don’t care if I later find reasons or points to disagree on something different. It will not make me waste my time adjusting upvotes. Common ground is very important.