Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Please don't upvote stories before reading the comments

news.ycombinator.com

11–20 of 31 posts

Re: Ask HN: Please don't upvote stories before reading the comments

#12
post #5

Hacker News is a user curated news site, not a forum.

I can't agree with this- HN is absolutely a discussion forum, that revolves around the user submitted 'news' (which is often blog opinion). I have gained much more from reading the comments here than the articles submitted.

Re: Ask HN: Please don't upvote stories before reading the comments

#14
You're assuming that I am not capable of making my own judgement on how credible it sounds. For example, I just upvoted the Bad Astronomy takedown of that article based entirely on reading the first page - I think it should be upvoted independent of what other people think.

Now, sometimes I will check the comments before upvoting. But not always.

Re: Ask HN: Please don't upvote stories before reading the comments

#17
The top story on HN as of this comment is a Slate article debunking the bacteria claim, validating not only the newsworthiness of the original story, but also highlighting the full-arc drama HNers got to follow by seeing both stories featured prominently on the front page.

On the other hand, let's consider scenarios where your concern might be totally valid -- say, if the same article was simply link-bait to a spammer's penny stock advertisement. In that case the article might pop fast to the top of HN, but likely just as quickly flagged and removed. So, flagging of articles that are crass advertising, flaming link-bait or just plain inappropriate for HN is the remedy there.

The question is -- is there a case where a story is appropriate for HN and not likely to get flagged, but also is not nearly as worthy or compelling as the title suggests?

I'm having a hard time coming up with that scenario, but in true HN-form I'm willing to be corrected. While I disagree with your statement that "It would be a very interesting result IF it were confirmed to be true," (and that seems to be the emerging consensus), I pose the question back to you and HNers -- what would be the scenario where reading the comments prior to upvoting would help improve the quality of story on HN page one, where flagging is also not the appropriate remedy?

Re: Ask HN: Please don't upvote stories before reading the comments

#18

I disagree. It was still an interesting story and the resulting discussion was both interesting and educational. Suppressing that kind of discussion would make HN a less valuable place, not more valuable.

I agree with this. I have upvoted stories that were factually inaccurate because of the resulting discussion here.

Crazy claims tend to produce some really interesting stuff.

Re: Ask HN: Please don't upvote stories before reading the comments

#19

The top story on HN as of this comment is a Slate article debunking the bacteria claim, validating not only the newsworthiness of the original story, but also highlighting the full-arc drama HNers got to follow by seeing both stories featured prominently on the front page. On the other hand , let's consider scenarios where your concern might be totally valid -- say, if the same article was simply link-bait to a spamm…

The problem is that many of us have lost our flagging privileges (accidentally tapping "unflag" after tapping "flag" really quickly seems to remove flagging abilities), so by the time the right people can flag the article it might already have the upvotes to stay at the top.
Post reply on HN