Yeah. It technically makes sense, but it’s really not as not as clever as people on reddit seem to think. If you concede you upvoted because it was very cool, but clicked because girl, then would you also not have clicked, if not for girl? And if you would not have clicked *but for* girl, how would you have upvoted? The chain of causation leading to the upvote only exists because you clicked because girl. So *prima facie* it seems meaningless… unless there’s a situation where you will click, because girl, and then do *not* upvote, because, despite girl, it’s not actually that cool. (Fair enough, but here I somehow I doubt people who click because girl would fail to upvote if not cool enough.)

Further, even with the exception allowed for (that you may refuse to upvote even if girl), the fact that you upvoted this is *still* only because you saw the girl, which is openly stated! That is, you perfectly admit that you initially gave this extra attention because girl, whereas you may not always give other meritorious content the attention it deserves. “Upvoted because girl” doesn’t necessarily *mean* you don’t *also* think it’s cool when you see it, or that it’s not cool! It just points out *why* this *in particular* was upvoted. So that sub actually does *very little* to refute the criticism at the core of “upvoted because girl.”