One baffling design decision (to use the most charitable language I can) in media platforms that's bafflingly common is the decision to allow users to upvote their own content... but not do so automatically. On Youtube, Twitter, dev.to, minds.com, Flipnote Hatena the only platform that actually let you add unlimited stars to something by tapping it indefinitely - that's not a joke, Disqus, and liberty.me, you can like your own content, but it's not liked by default.

The destructive implications are likely visible to anyone who spends a lot of time on these platforms. The time wasted liking your own stuff is small, but on most of these platforms there's a cultural hostility to liking your own content. I've been criticized and even flamed for it on several of these platforms.

But what's actually dishonorable about this? If the platform designers intentionally give us the ability to do it, why should we treat it as not "fair play"? I'm just using the provided means to promote my own content, because obviously I think my own content deserves views (or else I wouldn't have posted it).

On Reddit (and curiously in Dev.to comments but not Dev.to posts), you can like your own stuff, but it's done automatically, and I've yet to see any hostility resulting from it on those platforms. In fact, there's some legitimate use for the ability to like your own stuff; I've chosen to un-upvote or even downvote my own Reddit posts if I later decide I was wrong (or in one case because I realized I misread the person I was replying to and said something rather abrasive as a result). But this is a very rare use.

Stack Exchange is actually the only platform I can think of where you can't upvote your own stuff.

A similar and far worse practice on some platforms that have a view counter as well as a like counter is that your own views count. This is the case on Youtube, Twitter, and (if I remember correctly) Blogspot. And it about makes me want to hack them and fix it for them.