Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Why downvote? I honestly do not get it.

news.ycombinator.com

111–120 of 128 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why downvote? I honestly do not get it.

#111
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There must be a better way to asses the "value" of content. I agree that the down vote is arguably a good gauge for how the community at large "feels" about the content but not a good indicator for "value". There are two metrics here that I do not believe can be extracted from a voting system. I rarely comment, one of the few time I did I got down voted. I returned 3 days later and tried to defend my position, but it…

Of course comment score doesn't display value objectively or comprehensibly or indefinitely. Every topic has it's decay period, you may have made a good point, but if the community doesn't feel that way during lifetime of the topic , then that was a lost cause. If it really matters try again, as you just did. If it doesn't - leave it alone. There are many other things that HN doesn't do and leaves for people to figur…

I agree the marginal improvement may not be worth the effort.The web application I alluded to would offer this "content valuing" service to a community. It's actually on our wish list and not the main value-add of the offering

Re: Ask HN: Why downvote? I honestly do not get it.

#112
I sort of agree with you, but I would only up vote to show that the topic / comment was interesting, even if I did not agree with it . Up/down voting because i agree or disagree is arrogant. If it makes people feel better, bully for them. The danger is that a group of people will upvote a perspective and alienate alternative points of view from a thread. This creates a narrow minded culture and prevents interesting discussions. Ideally there is no point posing to a thread you agree with if you have no content to add.

Re: Ask HN: Why downvote? I honestly do not get it.

#114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I say threatening I mean with the intent to discourage . so when you down vote someone you disagree with you essentially discourage them from voicing their opinion. Why? Because when I'm downvoted I'm being punished. I don't want to be punished, so I either leave the community and decrease the variation in opinions or refrain from voicing it again. Is that what we want to allow here, or anywhere? We ignore the k…

We ignore the kkk. No, I decry the KKK. And the FBI infiltrated the KKK, and private lawsuits have largely bankrupted the KKK. The KKK gets plenty of push-back, and deserves every bit of the push-back it gets.

We should ignore the KKK.

Obviously there will be times they will step out of simply just speech and opinion, and for that they should be punished. If they act out on their hate and prejudice that is. But if all they are doing is expressing an opinion then let them, for it is not for you to judge who shall have the right opinions in this country. If you disagree, simply ignore them, for truth shall hold them accountable and you shall be vindicated without effort. But if you condemn their thoughts then you exhibit fear. For any righteous man would not fear a wrong idea, because reality shall not let a wrong idea prevail. So if you truly believe your ideas are right then let those who disagree do so in peace. Reality shall punish them enough for their ignorance.

Also our laws are designed to encourge only ignoring. Why else can't we just jail them right there? Because there is no thought police, and you shalln't be one either!

EDIT: It may be true that they do deserve all negative actions directed towards them. I just want to make it clear that I do not support the KKK. I think physical and emotional attacks from the KKK do justify corrective action against them.

I'd also like to add that the best way to raise a child is to ignore them when they get angry, not punish. I think that was researched somewhere or something.

Re: Ask HN: Why downvote? I honestly do not get it.

#115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can't judge a comment for a degree of "correctness", you can't judge one comment as "better" than another.

Yes you're right. We each have our own definition of "better," as we do have for "correct." But it's less detrimental/errpr to just have you judge "better" than to have you judge both "better" and "worse" which is what happens when we allow judgements of "correct."

Why?

Really, please explain.

Re: Ask HN: Why downvote? I honestly do not get it.

#116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Discouragement is not punishment. "We ignore the kkk." Living in a state that actually occasionally has KKK rallies, "we" sure as Hell don't ignore them. We surround them with counter-protesters whenever they march in their sheets - and outnumber them by many multiples. We look at people ranting on about those dirty, criminal n---s and how America used to be white and pure and call them stupid fucking racists. No, we…

Down voting is an official active punishment that is meant to discourage. Down voting is a form of punishment. Ignoring is not a form of punishment. It's passive. What you describe may be mistaken as an active form of punishment, but you're essentially up voting the non racists, not down voting the racists. You aren't punishing the racists for their behavior so much as you are showing support for the other side. You…

I'm afraid you genuinely make no sense.

Re: Ask HN: Why downvote? I honestly do not get it.

#117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone can be off-topic or troll in opinion threads. "What's your favorite X?" is not the place for "Stop using different types of Xs and start using Ys, noobs.", for example.

As much as someone could type that, someone could also downvote because they were thinking that.

Indeed. And yet, while trolls get downvoted to pale gray happens, entire threads getting their comments downvoted as far doesn't.

Re: Ask HN: Why downvote? I honestly do not get it.

#118
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet, my only comments that actually get upvoted are garbage one-liner humor comments. EDIT: I believe this is what we call irony: http://i588.photobucket.com/albums/ss323/araneae/hn.png

I upvoted you for the rather ironic screenshot. As for the best way to get upvoted: "Agree with the rest of the crowd." HN is a very "Go with the flow" crowd. In my observation it doesn't usually pay to have a difference of opinion, which is slightly ironic since this site is aimed at hackers, who, you would hope, should have unique viewpoints.

[deleted]

Re: Ask HN: Why downvote? I honestly do not get it.

#119
Of course, I dislike being downvoted. If I think it was because I was misunderstood or misinterpreted, I will post in response to the downvote. Clarification sometimes gets the original post upvoted, as well as the clarification. If it's a case of "Yeah, I was trying to avoid getting into that because I just knew it would go over badly and now I've been downvoted, confirming what I thought" or a case of me just not saying something well because I was having a bad day, I generally leave it alone. No point in pouring gasoline on the fire, so to speak (which is generally what's going to happen if I am already sticking my feet in my mouth because I don't feel well and now I am all defensive and trying to "clarify"....downward spiral ensues).

On the one hand, I often do wish people would converse with me and tell me what they "heard" that they think it's a bad comment. In many cases, it turns out be a misunderstanding. The vast majority of meaning in face-to-face communication comes from facial expression, body language, voice tone and context. The actual words are a very small part of the meaning conveyed. But on the 'Net, the words are about all we have. If two people come from very different backgrounds, misunderstandings are practically guaranteed.

On the other hand, an Iranian friend once told me that there is a saying in Iran: "Silence is the only good answer to stupid people." I would modify that slightly to "Silence is the only good answer to something stupid." We all do stupid stuff at times. It isn't proof we are generally stupid. It's just part of the human condition. An anonymous downvote, though it may be upsetting to the receiver, is probably a lot less destructive to the community than being able to put a name to the criticism and having to try to express the criticism in words. Running battles between two members who just don't ever agree on anything can be very destructive to a forum. I think the capacity to downvote helps avoid such outcomes.

I am still getting a feel for how HN works. But so far I am finding that the system here seems to do a better job of minimizing some of the negative social crapola you find everywhere. Conflict of interest will never go away. Interpersonal friction between some members is inevitable. Spammers and all kinds of other undesirable stuff is also a fact of life. There has to be a means to address that. Warm-fuzzy 'let's only upvote people' solutions won't work. It has no teeth.

Re: Ask HN: Why downvote? I honestly do not get it.

#120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes you're right. We each have our own definition of "better," as we do have for "correct." But it's less detrimental/errpr to just have you judge "better" than to have you judge both "better" and "worse" which is what happens when we allow judgements of "correct."

Why? Really, please explain.

Because we can still sort comment by just up voting. But removing down voting would slow down the sorting process, therefore less power is there to disrupt the organization of comments.

I'll agree this may be viewed as one disadvantage of the system, but it also means there is less power in the individual to to push down the comment. It would require a bunch of up votes all the other comments in order to push down a comment.

That's why letting people to only up vote is less capable of silencing an opposition or unpopular view.

Post reply on HN