Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Kind reminder: please (re)read the HN guidelines

ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 141 posts

Re: Kind reminder: please (re)read the HN guidelines

#61

Post by tokenadult »

georgecmu wrote: post #51
lionhearted wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, though the worst trend I see is emotional comments getting voted up more. Maybe I'm seeing the past more warmly than it was, but it seems like clear, logical, consistent, coherent comments got voted up and emotional based comments stayed around 1 or got voted down. It seems like a lot of emotional reactions are getting voted up even when they're not coherent, consistent, and logical - which seems a bad trend.

The worst trend I see is comments getting downvoted based on opinions expressed within, not on how poorly they are expressed. No matter how thoughtful a comment, if it goes against the groupthink, you can expect it to hurt your karma.

Here is an example from 925 days ago of pg saying it is okay to downvote for disagreement.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171

He is still thinking about tweaking the forum settings here to ensure good discussion. On my part, I'm a good bit more disappointed when a user asks a polite follow-up question (for example, "What would be a source I could check to confirm that fact?") and that kind of comment gets downvoted. Why do people disagree with trying to find out more information to enlighten the discussion?

Re: Kind reminder: please (re)read the HN guidelines

#62

Post by duairc »

pg wrote: post #49
kscaldef wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you collect any metrics on user behavior? For example, it seem to me like downvoting (and particularly the abuse of downvoting) is on the rise. But this is just a gut feeling based on my particular comment history.

I don't think people are more apt to downvote than in the past. But there are a lot more voters. Plus I recently removed the -4 threshold on comment scores and instead merely never display a number lower than -4. So downvoted comments now cost more karma. (This was in response to people who would say asshole things, knowing they couldn't cost them more than 4 points.)

I don't know, I definitely think people a people a much more inclined to downvote for the wrong reasons. I've made a lot of posts in the last day, one of which was by far the longest post in a 200+ comment thread, none of which I think were in any way rude or anything like that, and despite that it's cost me around -10 karma overall (mostly because of one post in particular, which I don't think was that bad. A strong opinion, but no personal attacks or anything).

I've also observed a lot of posts being modded into oblivion for saying things like "thanks" and stuff like that. People generally seem to downvote posts which they disagree with, regardless of how polite or well-reasoned they are.

Re: Kind reminder: please (re)read the HN guidelines

#63

Post by kevinskii »

revorad wrote: post #28

One question I ask myself now before commenting is: Will this comment significantly improve this conversation? I try not to comment if the comment is merely: 1. clever and amusing 2. expressing anger/disagreement 3. disproving a wrong but unimportant claim made by another commenter. Besides these, submitting, upvoting, downvoting, not voting and flagging are enough to make HN more interesting for myself.

I also try to stop myself from saying the same things that others have already said--i.e. "piling on."

Re: Kind reminder: please (re)read the HN guidelines

#64

Post by steveklabnik »

duairc wrote: post #62
pg wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think people are more apt to downvote than in the past. But there are a lot more voters. Plus I recently removed the -4 threshold on comment scores and instead merely never display a number lower than -4. So downvoted comments now cost more karma. (This was in response to people who would say asshole things, knowing they couldn't cost them more than 4 points.)

I don't know, I definitely think people a people a much more inclined to downvote for the wrong reasons. I've made a lot of posts in the last day, one of which was by far the longest post in a 200+ comment thread, none of which I think were in any way rude or anything like that, and despite that it's cost me around -10 karma overall (mostly because of one post in particular, which I don't think was that bad. A strong…

While I (obviously) don't think you deserved it, it was a very short, controversial post, with nothing backing it up. [1]

And the "thanks" posts don't get downvoted because of a personal disagreement, it's that a comment that just says "awesome, thanks!" doesn't add any value to the discussion. An upvote would suffice.

1: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1643726

Re: Kind reminder: please (re)read the HN guidelines

#65

Post by binspace »

_cbsz wrote: post #43
bpyne wrote: post #32

As long as someone has opened up a guideline discussion.... "Resist complaining about being downmodded. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading." Agreed in full. However, downmodding without constructive criticism leaves the downmodded with no sense of what to improve in the next comment. A downmod could easily be due to underdeveloped point, style, or disagreement about an opinion. At least 2 of the 3 re…

So assume it's that your comment fell into the "noise" category and work harder on producing "signal" next time. We don't need to have a discussion every time someone felt that some post did not contribute sufficiently to the discussion.

How about this for a HN feature.

If your post is That way, the person who was downvoted has an opportunity to read about some common reasons why a post was downvoted, read tips on making better comments, and has more time to emotionally process being downvoted.

Re: Kind reminder: please (re)read the HN guidelines

#68

Post by anamax »

georgecmu wrote: post #51
lionhearted wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, though the worst trend I see is emotional comments getting voted up more. Maybe I'm seeing the past more warmly than it was, but it seems like clear, logical, consistent, coherent comments got voted up and emotional based comments stayed around 1 or got voted down. It seems like a lot of emotional reactions are getting voted up even when they're not coherent, consistent, and logical - which seems a bad trend.

The worst trend I see is comments getting downvoted based on opinions expressed within, not on how poorly they are expressed. No matter how thoughtful a comment, if it goes against the groupthink, you can expect it to hurt your karma.

> No matter how thoughtful a comment, if it goes against the groupthink, you can expect it to hurt your karma.

So what? If you think that karma means something significant, you're doing it wrong.

As to whether "thoughful" comments get significant downvotes, I don't see it. Instead, I see a bunch of earnest twaddle.

Symptomatic of that is the belief that "thoughtful" is a worthwhile characteristic. It isn't.

> The worst trend I see is comments getting downvoted based on opinions expressed within, not on how poorly they are expressed.

Artfully expressed nonsense is still nonsense.

In other news, HN isn't intended to make you feel good about yourself, no matter how special your mother says you are.

Re: Kind reminder: please (re)read the HN guidelines

#70

Post by messel »

edw519 wrote: post #45
swombat wrote: post #7

Yes, yes, HN is going to the dogs, it's not as good as it used to be, it's all because of the new users, and so on and so on. It's been like that since I joined two and a half years ago.

Right on, swombat. Last year, upon Iteration 27 of this same subject, I threw something like this together in jest: Quality of HN Comments Over Time | . . | . . q| . . . . u| . . . . . . a| . . . . . l| . . . . . i| . . . . . t| . . . you are here -->. . y| (that's all) |________________________________________________________ M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A '09 '10 I must have been on to some…

Holy crap I remember that plot. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=926806

Damn, we're always in the same spot, the years just keep flowing underneath us.

Post reply on HN