Question copied from Christopher Rubin's comments at https://www.quora.com/Is-it-possible-to-make-the-Quora-blocking-feature-any-less-effective/answer/Christopher-Rubin-1/comment/794877 and inspired by our (transparent) thoughts together:

Chris: "I don't see why names aren't associated with downvotes whilst they are with upvotes. It would give one a sense of the territory - especially if there were a reason given. "

Gabriel: "Transparency would be insightful, or otherwise, violent, to some people, if I always saw who downvoted me, and it was always some person, or particular kinda of people... it could feel like being more of a fight.

That's one angle. Another angle is how transparency would force us to understand realities of each other's views. In full, clear, undeniable view.

I don't think either side should be dismissed."

Chris: "agreed + perhaps it would make people more judicious with their downvotes. as it is now, it's merely a casual flick of the finger."

Gabriel: "Every part of that feels really too true. Are we willing to be held fully accountable?

I want us to ask ourselves ideas like maybe "How can we make our negative opinions and actions more productive?" Maybe by letting us show our true selves? Full responsibility?


Do you want to ask ~ "Could people be more judicious with their downvotes if it showed their name with their vote?" (Maybe link to your thread.) If you don't, I'd like to, because I think others might appreciate.

Alas, I very, very rarely downvote. Definitely under 5-10 times on all my social networks, for all year."

Chris: please feel free to. thx! i think that the feature is really not well defined or understood (even to me + i have been an avid user for the past 6 months or so).