This question drew my attention to the method used for minority opinions in questions that don't have a clear cut answer. While I understand the democratic approach to answers, what seems to happen in practice is viewers read through the top answer (or maybe the first few) and upvote or downvote as they see fit. This makes answers below those receive less attention in general than others which is frankly undemocratic, similar to the suppression of opposition in totalitarian regimes (not that this is to that level). Anecdotally, the posts I've had that are in minority opinions received 6-8 votes total (up or down) compared to up to at least 20 for the top answers in some questions (This seems to be widespread).
Is there a way to fix this problem? Do we not see it as a problem?
Here are a couple solutions I've thought up (none of my arguments are based on my answers, but could come up in other situations)
- Display upvotes and downvotes separately sorting by upvotes only.
- This system would allow minority opinions with substantial merit on one side of a potentially close debate to be seen despite the downvotes from the other side.
- Do not display downvotes from people who upvotes other answers (or answered the question themselves)
- Since this tactic essentially votes twice and exasterabates the condition I described earlier. Of course there is no reason these votes shouldn't be factored but displaying them and considering them for answer order is problematic.
- Allow for a promoted minority opinion.
- Enable an answerer with an opinion directly contrary to promote the answer (pending enough votes similar to reopening a question) to be placed on the second position on the order hiding the vote count. Then, when it s received enough attention (by days or up/downvotes), a vote could be started to determine if it should remain there or be returned to it's original state permanently.
- Any combination of these options
Here are some other examples of why this system would be an improvement by allowing opinions contrary to the majority to be more easily accessed:
- In this case a reasoned argument for the other option to affecting the magic item is given without much hope of ever being seem from the much more accepted modifying the item answers
- In this case, the answer provides an elegant solution not accounted for by the too voted answers that addresses the question in a unique way but is likely not to get the attention of the other answers since they appear so widely accepted
- This answer outright states it's intent to provide an alternative to the other answers which for the most part support finding ways to make the rolls work. It is a wholly different approach to the question which isn't disqualified as a non-answer but may be the right answer to another asker who finds this question with a slightly different mindset.