user157: I've just taken the plunge and answered a few questions. One has attracted two downvotes 
Is it possible to recognize a person who has achieved Arhatship?
I think i shall just about survive the shame. But it spurs me on to ask a general question about how we should use votes - specifically downvotes. Are we going to encourage downvoting of content to encourage the best to rise to the top - in a bit of a Darwinian fashion. Or are we going to use them sparingly perhaps only to flag up the worst content and event then only by a little downvote tweak.
I would personally like to keep things as positive as possible. Philosophy SE has always had a positive vibe to me and even quite bizarre questions don't attract a mass downvote fest. Whereas Stack Overflow can be quite an extreme (hostile) place particularly on certain subjects (JQuery is brutal)
Anyway I hope this isn't a moan - but just an opportunity to clarify ethos of the site in it's early days.

user230: I have some experience with moderation on large, busy sites and will offer my experience / advice.
I would suggest downvotes can be used as an opportunity for improvement and are not necessarily intended as some sort of punishment or discouragement.
Part of the puropose of downvotes, at leaset IMO, is to encourage improvement in the quality of answers. When I downvote I try to add a comment as to the reason for the downvote and suggestions for improvement.
If the OP edits the question, I then retract my downvote.
I would also suggest, one alternate to a downvote is to edit the answer.
At the end of the day, moderation is a community effort based on elections of moderators and also one's reputation and IMO the goal of moderation is to improve the quality of answers on this site.
You can not "force" anyone to use downvotes in any particular way without editing the priviliges of this site and it would take a large consensus to do so.

user-1: 
I undertake the training rule to abstain from false speech.   Musāvādā veramaṇī sikkhāpadaṃ samādiyāmi.

In Thich Nhat Hanh's teaching this training is expanded to

Aware of the suffering caused by unmindful speech and the inability to listen to others, I vow to cultivate loving speech and deep listening in order to bring joy and happiness to others and relieve others of their suffering.  Knowing that words can create happiness or suffering, I vow to learn to speak truthfully, with words that inspire self-confidence, joy, and hope.  I am determined not to spread news that I do not know to be certain and not to criticize or condemn things of which I am not sure.  I will refrain from uttering words that can cause division or discord, or that can cause the family or the community to break.  I will make all efforts to reconcile and resolve all conflicts, however small.

In the Pali canon there is also the concept of right speech (samyag-vāc / sammā-vācā):

And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, and from idle chatter: This is called right speech.

I would like to suggest that in our corrections we endeavor to "cultivate loving speech and deep listening."  This would seem to me to indicate that we should first attempt correction by comment and only if that fails down-vote or flag. 
I would prefer that we in the forum cultivate the Three Virtues:

Compassion
Loving Kindness
Equanimity


user4: There are lots of questions at Meta.SE about downvoting. What I have learned from there:

Voting is merely site-specific. They show what Q&A are good or bad for this particular community


Except several common SE rules;

Downvotes on questions define scope of the site — as it is seen by the community;
Downvotes answers define what the community expects from the answers — again, it may not match what you think on this;
Communities are really different. What's good for one, can be unacceptable for another.

I have abandoned my participation at one of the betas where I'm still in #21 by reputation (an year after abandonment) specifically because of aggressive donvoting. IIRC, I have seen Q&A downvoted to the oblivion (nearly 10 downvotes) there.
To me, it is sufficient to make a Q or A some score of -1 or -2 and cast a close-vote. But again, not many people are actually aware about this.
You actually have several options:

Adopt to what the community expects from you. Maybe this is the most Buddhist approach. :)
You are the part of community. Try to form another attitude:


by commenting on good or bad Q&A, explaining your opinion. This takes a lot of effort;
by trying to invite more people to Meta discussions and raise questions here. You do it already, but not many users visit Meta sites.

Or, as the very last option, just leave.

P.S. I don't want my answer to look very pessimistic, so let me finish it with a statement that we are here to learn and share our knowledge. Let's find out some rules that will make us happy together.

157: <p>I've just taken the plunge and answered a few questions. One has attracted two downvotes </p>

<p><a href="https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/172/is-it-possible-to-recognize-a-person-who-has-achieved-arhatship/173#173">Is it possible to recognize a person who has achieved Arhatship?</a></p>

<p>I think i shall just about survive the shame. But it spurs me on to ask a general question about how we should use votes - specifically downvotes. Are we going to encourage downvoting of content to encourage the best to rise to the top - in a bit of a Darwinian fashion. Or are we going to use them sparingly perhaps only to flag up the worst content and event then only by a little downvote tweak.</p>

<p>I would personally like to keep things as positive as possible. Philosophy SE has always had a positive vibe to me and even quite bizarre questions don't attract a mass downvote fest. Whereas Stack Overflow can be quite an extreme (hostile) place particularly on certain subjects (JQuery is brutal)</p>

<p>Anyway I hope this isn't a moan - but just an opportunity to clarify ethos of the site in it's early days.</p>
 230: <p>I have some experience with moderation on large, busy sites and will offer my experience / advice.</p>

<p>I would suggest downvotes can be used as an opportunity for improvement and are not necessarily intended as some sort of punishment or discouragement.</p>

<p>Part of the puropose of downvotes, at leaset IMO, is to encourage improvement in the quality of answers. When I downvote I <em>try</em> to add a comment as to the reason for the downvote and suggestions for improvement.</p>

<p>If the OP edits the question, I then retract my downvote.</p>

<p>I would also suggest, one alternate to a downvote is to <strong>edit the answer</strong>.</p>

<p>At the end of the day, moderation is a community effort based on elections of moderators and also one's reputation and IMO the goal of moderation is to improve the quality of answers on this site.</p>

<p>You can not "force" anyone to use downvotes in any particular way without editing the priviliges of this site and it would take a large consensus to do so.</p>
 -1: <blockquote>
  <p>I undertake the training rule to abstain from false speech.   Musāvādā veramaṇī sikkhāpadaṃ samādiyāmi.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>In Thich Nhat Hanh's teaching this training is expanded to</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Aware of the suffering caused by unmindful speech and the inability to listen to others, I vow to cultivate loving speech and deep listening in order to bring joy and happiness to others and relieve others of their suffering.  Knowing that words can create happiness or suffering, I vow to learn to speak truthfully, with words that inspire self-confidence, joy, and hope.  I am determined not to spread news that I do not know to be certain and not to criticize or condemn things of which I am not sure.  I will refrain from uttering words that can cause division or discord, or that can cause the family or the community to break.  I will make all efforts to reconcile and resolve all conflicts, however small.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>In the Pali canon there is also the concept of right speech (samyag-vāc / sammā-vācā):</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, and from idle chatter: This is called right speech.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I would like to suggest that in our corrections we endeavor to "cultivate loving speech and deep listening."  This would seem to me to indicate that we should first attempt correction by comment and only if that fails down-vote or flag. </p>

<p>I would prefer that we in the forum cultivate the Three Virtues:</p>

<ul>
<li>Compassion</li>
<li>Loving Kindness</li>
<li>Equanimity</li>
</ul>
 4: <p>There are <a href="https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/down-votes?sort=votes&amp;pageSize=15">lots of questions at Meta.SE</a> about downvoting. What I have learned from there:</p>

<ul>
<li>Voting is merely site-specific. They show what Q&amp;A are good or bad for this particular community

<ul>
<li>Except several common SE rules;</li>
</ul></li>
<li>Downvotes on questions define scope of the site — as it is seen by the community;</li>
<li>Downvotes answers define what the community expects from the answers — again, it may not match what you think on this;</li>
<li>Communities are really different. What's good for one, can be unacceptable for another.</li>
</ul>

<p>I have abandoned my participation at one of the betas where I'm still in #21 by reputation (an year after abandonment) specifically because of aggressive donvoting. IIRC, I have seen Q&amp;A downvoted to the oblivion (nearly 10 downvotes) there.<br>
To me, it is sufficient to make a Q or A some score of -1 or -2 and cast a close-vote. But again, not many people are actually aware about this.</p>

<p><strong>You actually have several options:</strong></p>

<ol>
<li>Adopt to what the community expects from you. Maybe this is the most Buddhist approach. :)</li>
<li>You are the part of community. Try to form another attitude:

<ul>
<li>by commenting on good or bad Q&amp;A, explaining your opinion. This takes a lot of effort;</li>
<li>by trying to invite more people to Meta discussions and raise questions here. You do it already, but not many users visit Meta sites.</li>
</ul></li>
<li>Or, as the very last option, just leave.</li>
</ol>

<p>P.S. I don't want my answer to look very pessimistic, so let me finish it with a statement that we are here to learn and share our knowledge. Let's find out some rules that will make us happy together.</p>
