Down Voting! Is it helpful?

I only down vote when someone personally attacks me

I think down votes should require a comment, drive by down voting isn't conducive to conversation.

What sets Rallypoint apart from other social networks is the concept of Influence Score. It's semi-helpful. If nothing else, it lets you know if others like what the person is saying... but it doesn't do enough to separate true leaders from people who sit at home in their underwear creating and responding to discussions all day. In my opinion, people that are real leaders aren't glued to Rallypoint. Most are away from the keyboard living in the real world, not the virtual world of the Internet.

There was a time when I followed influence score, but I don't much care anymore. Influence score is partially helpful in determining who might give good advice, but the awards system does a better job of letting you know if lots of people agree with what that person is saying. The more Nice Question, Thought Leader, Good Response, etc. badges a person has, the more potential they have to give good advice as I see it because that means what they said resonated with more people.

I see a purpose for downvoting. It separates Rallypoint from other social media such as Facebook. With that said, tit for tat downvoting is common and I have lost well over a thousand points to drive by downvoters that didn't have the courtesy to explain their downvotes. Do I care if people downvote my opinions? Well, I'll just put it this way. I don't let the thought of getting downvoted or complained about stop me from saying what needs to be said.

Rallypoint doesn't require explanation and that allows people to drive by downvote. I don't see that as constructive. I believe that Rallypoint should implement a policy that if someone downvotes, they must explain it or the downvote goes away. That would be difficult to implement though because someone could leave a comment totally unrelated to the downvote and it would require human intervention to enforce.

Another possibility is to simply make downvotes not count against one's influence score. That takes away the punishment incentive.

Rallypoint recently implemented a block feature. It solves the problem, not by taking away the incentive to downvote; rather, it gives those downvoted a means to protect themselves from serial downvoters. That said, even the block feature can be abused. Unlike Facebook, which makes people you block invisible, Rallypoint lets you see everything they say, so they can keep on annoying you with their comments. They can't comment to you directly but they can still comment on discussions you start so long as they are commenting to someone else's comment.

I've used the block feature twice: once as a preventive measure to keep an annoying member who blocked me from unblocking me temporarily to answer something I wrote, and then reblocking me so I couldn't respond; and once to nip a serial downvoter in the bud.

Blocking is sort of a half solution to dealing with problem members, but it's better than it was. People no longer have to worry about serial downvoters trashing their Influence Score -- not that it matters. Perhaps if Rallypoint put in a users profile how many downvotes they gave out, that would be incentive for some to not serial downvote.

I have been down voted, and I have down voted.
Usually for people not adding to the discussion, or arguing for points unrelated to the original topic, etc.
What I think is unhelpful is points. Because of that people take down voting personally. Most people I have down voted have then gone and down voted me back, sometimes on unrelated topics.
Votes just rate that particular comment. And that's where it should stay. This post is +1, another +10, another -2, etc. Instead of this post gave me 50 points, that one 500, another -60, etc.

I agree with you; LTC Romanic. Voting down serves no purpose. I mean, for instance, you yourself lost 1,000 points. In my estimation, that is totally disproportionate to anything that you might have said.
I am all for encouraging one another.

After I first joined rally point I used my iPhone to log on to the site. One night I accidently dragged my finger across a Civil Affairs LTC/MAJ (can't remember) and the sensitive screen activated the thumbs down link. I felt a little bad for having allowed my fat fingers get the best of me without my knowledge. Needless to say, I issued an apology once I recognized what I had done.

It doesn't really bother me because people are entitled to their opinions, but if they vote a thumbs down and fail to report why, well that is unacceptable.

I don't downvote replies or comments within a thread; I'll just ignore those (most of the time) if I strongly disagree. However, I'll downvote a main post (i.e. the question) if I think it is inappropriate for RP (for instance, if it appears to serve no purpose other than someone trolling). When enough people downvote, the post will be reviewed for possible removal.

I don't down vote or block ...

then ... thumb up should be eliminated too. :)

If there is a valid reason for a down vote I say use it, but if you merely disagree then move on.