Frontends could experiment with a 'like' system. Both up and down, separate from votes. From there someone could have a better idea if something should be downvoted or not.

On centralized systems, the downvote or thumbs down is typically used to adjust further suggested content. Vast majority doesn't touch it. Only rarely are they used as a form of genuine expression. When the numbers are higher than average, that's often due to outside contributing factors. For instance, the cancel culture types. They're bringing feelings from the past to anything new. The tallied up downvotes are not highlighting poor quality content. People will apply politics as well in order to help create the illusion of unpopular opinion. Due to the anonymity on the surface, people can act nefariously and get away with creating an illusion. The anonymity is an illusion in itself though. The system or platform knows exactly which accounts are doing what. That data is valuable to them. Creating the illusion of anonymity encourages people to act 'honestly', but what's honest in society isn't always clean or pure. It can be dark and disturbing.

Facebook has the angry emoji. But what's interesting/peculiar about that product is how some content shows up to intentionally piss people off. It's placing certain subject matter in front of those who will disagree in order to help create the illusion an idea is unpopular.

The more I think about this, the less I want to see anonymity applied to voting. For instance, anyone offering a donation on Youtube superchat takes center stage for a moment. The names of accounts donating will even flash across the screen during twitch streams.