Why do people downvote other members' content for no reason at all?
No-one can improve their content without knowing what is wrong with it. Downvoting without a constructive comment makes no sense. No-one gets any wiser or happier.
Why do people downvote other members' content for no reason at all?
No-one can improve their content without knowing what is wrong with it. Downvoting without a constructive comment makes no sense. No-one gets any wiser or happier.
Why do people downvote other members' content for no reason at all?
People don't. There is typically a reason.
This website is not intended as a game, or a personal blog. This website is intended as a means for readers to learn from past questions. Downvoting is a way to alert potential future readers of low quality content, such as incorrect information or people pushing personal beliefs. It may also help to encourage answerers to write answers of higher quality, but that is a secondary goal.
Downvoting does not help improve answer qualities for answerers who stubbornly refuse to change, and would rather complain on Meta than agree that their answers have low quality. For those, it is really just a warning to audiences.
A particular case are wrong-way drivers:
"What is the point of honking cars, honking does not explain anything" - "people told you in the past why they honk" - "I have never received constructive feedback on my driving, it's all just silly complaints" - "people honk because you drive on the wrong side of the road" - "I have never driven in the wrong side, all my life I have driven on that side, it's been taught to me." - "You're in a different country now." - "Country has nothing to do with it, there is only one right side" - "This country has different laws" - "Then clearly the laws need to be changed. I really wish those people would stop honking. Why don't they just follow my lead and drive on my side if the road. It's so aggressive."
Welcome to the Internet! Where anonymity and lack of consequence are paired to produce less than productive behavior.
You are absolutely right that in a classroom, any teacher, for instance, would be remiss in not providing feedback after grading. But a teacher is someone who has your best interests in mind, and the student-teacher bond is built into the pedagogy, encouraged by society, and theoretically is affirmed by administrators assessing instruction. The Internet is none of these things.
A forum like this is both free and has no barrier to entry other than a basic capacity to read and write English. That means participation can be in whatever manner a participant sees fit and that does not elicit a moderator response, which in the interest of fairness and in line with the fact that moderators are volunteers, means wide berth is given.
Many people read this site, and the cost of expressing disagreement amounts to a click of a button. While there are many academically trained and professionally motivated philosophers here, there are also great swaths of people who know very little. Thus, down-votes without correction are often the manifestation of people who have very little invested in the site or your intellectual growth, and who feel entitled and are empowered to express their displeasure or disagreement with you.
So, while what you claim is both true and lamentable, as long as the economics are what they are, the occasional rationale-less down-vote is inevitable.