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

Ask HN: Downvoting

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 57 posts

Re: Ask HN: Downvoting

#21

Post by JoachimSchipper »

saurik wrote: post #17
JoachimSchipper wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a difference between "int i = INT_MAX + 1 is legal C" (appropriate but factually wrong) and "fsck off, you moron".

...but then, what is the difference between an opinion you disagree with (a "dissenting view") and one that you believe to be factually incorrect? I feel like downvoting the former "factually wrong" comment leads to the behavior that ColinWright is describing: where people downvote anything they disagree with. (One might even argue that this is a fundamental bug in having downvoting as a mechanism.)

"Dissenting view" is "Ruby is badly-engineered", "the poor remain poor chiefly because of a lack of discipline" or "PHP is extremely useful": you may or may not agree, but there are serious arguments to be made for those positions (and there is some degree of truth to each of them), and reasonable people can and do disagree on these issues.

On the other hand, "int i = INT_MAX + 1" is factually wrong, and you could link to the standard to prove it. Similarly, "the Sun orbits the earth" is factually wrong (to the extent that it's meaningful, at least).

Yes, there are edge cases, and yes, people tend to think that what they believe in is "obviously" the only right thing to believe in; but that doesn't mean that there's no difference at all.

Re: Ask HN: Downvoting

#22

Post by steventruong »

cageface wrote: post #19

I'd like to see it disappear, personally. The really bad comments tend to sink to the bottom of the page anyway and increasingly downvoting is being used capriciously and vindictively to ding opinions people just don't happen to agree with.

I agree with this. It irks me a bit that people would downvote simply because they have a different view. Sometimes completely unwarranted when the view or opinion does not affect the outcome of the thread or conversation.

I would rather have downvoting removed completely as well.

Re: Ask HN: Downvoting

#23

Post by peterhi »

ryall wrote: post #11

How about a limited amount of down-votes allocated to each member to dish out? Possibly tiered based on karma level? Perhaps a member that down-votes a comment loses karma if the comment is then up-voted by other members (ie deemed an unfair down-vote by others)?

The only problem here is that you are assuming only one point of view is correct. So if I down vote you because I believe what you are saying is wrong but a lot of supporters of your view up vote then I will be punished for having a discenting (or at least less popular) view.

Is this what you had in mind?

Re: Ask HN: Downvoting

#24

Post by steventruong »

ColinWright wrote: post #3

I would be interested in knowing how much of your description is deduction on your part, and how much is received fact from definitive sources. I would be interested in knowing how and why your comment was deemed "bad." I don't know of any definitive cases where someone made a comment that was appropriate, got vast numbers of down-votes, and then got banned because of it. I know of many people who have complained abo…

I'll give you one example. Recently, someone posted a link to the new update for Python 2.7.2. At the time, on the python website itself, it stated that this was not a production release and specifically said something along the lines of upgrade at your own risk (I quoted it word for word from the site).

I then made a personal statement saying "I guess I won't be upgrading". I felt that it may help those who didn't scan the page and may miss the quote. And the specific comment I made was one about me, that affects only me reflecting the statement I quoted off the python site. I started getting downvotes for no apparent reason (at least none that I could see reasonably). To avoid it, I just deleted the comment.

If others felt like they didn't care, they were more than welcome to download 2.7.2. I never said anything about why people shouldn't have downloaded it. All I wrote was literally what I just said above.

For the record, it now looks like the site has been updated to reflect that it is a full production release.

Re: Ask HN: Downvoting

#25

Post by JoachimSchipper »

ColinWright wrote: post #20
saurik wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...but then, what is the difference between an opinion you disagree with (a "dissenting view") and one that you believe to be factually incorrect? I feel like downvoting the former "factually wrong" comment leads to the behavior that ColinWright is describing: where people downvote anything they disagree with. (One might even argue that this is a fundamental bug in having downvoting as a mechanism.)

People do down-vote anything they disagree with, and there's nothing that can stop that. You can't change people's behavior. However, removing the ability to down-vote won't really change anything in this regard, except that it will stop people from feeling attacked when they get a down-vote. What would change is that there would be no feedback about genuinely inappropriate comments, and I think that would be bad. Th…

I think the "canonical" solution is changing the audience by migrating to a new site...

Re: Ask HN: Downvoting

#26

Post by ColinWright »

steventruong wrote: post #24
ColinWright wrote: post #3

I would be interested in knowing how much of your description is deduction on your part, and how much is received fact from definitive sources. I would be interested in knowing how and why your comment was deemed "bad." I don't know of any definitive cases where someone made a comment that was appropriate, got vast numbers of down-votes, and then got banned because of it. I know of many people who have complained abo…

I'll give you one example. Recently, someone posted a link to the new update for Python 2.7.2. At the time, on the python website itself, it stated that this was not a production release and specifically said something along the lines of upgrade at your own risk (I quoted it word for word from the site). I then made a personal statement saying "I guess I won't be upgrading". I felt that it may help those who didn't s…

Here's one way to think about it, based purely on what you've said. I didn't see your comment, so I don't know for sure:

Did you say anything unobvious? You quoted from the site that they declared it not to be a production release, and you said "OK - not for me." (I paraphrase)

We can easily deduce that, as it's not a production release, then not everyone will want it. Fine. What did your comment really add? It was a personal, conversational, largely content-free, throw-away observation.

This isn't a criticism, I'm merely trying to present a way of thinking that makes it less unreasonable for people to have down-voted a comment.

HN was always intended to be unlike other sites, strongly encouraging meaty content, strongly discouraging light and fluffy comments and submissions. It's been drifting away from that, so people are starting to feel that there's more space for conversational-like comments. There is something of a back-lash from some of the older hands who remember what it was like. Or what they think they remember it was like. More content, less conversation. Discussion, not throw-away remarks.

Re: Ask HN: Downvoting

#27

Post by ColinWright »

JoachimSchipper wrote: post #25
ColinWright wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People do down-vote anything they disagree with, and there's nothing that can stop that. You can't change people's behavior. However, removing the ability to down-vote won't really change anything in this regard, except that it will stop people from feeling attacked when they get a down-vote. What would change is that there would be no feedback about genuinely inappropriate comments, and I think that would be bad. Th…

I think the "canonical" solution is changing the audience by migrating to a new site...

That may yet happen/be happening.

Re: Ask HN: Downvoting

#28

Post by jinushaun »

ColinWright wrote: post #5
Animus7 wrote: post #2

People don't downvote dissenting views. They downvote comments that lack value to the discussion.

That was once the case, but I think it's no longer true. Of late I've seen relevant and constructive comments down-voted, and I've been able to discern no reason other than the view expressed was an unpopular one. If there's a mechanism to indicate a comment is inappropriate, people will use it to indicate disapproval. If there's no mechanism to indicate a comment is inappropriate, inappropriate and off-topic will ab…

Time and time again, Slashdot's voting system shows that it's superior to these simple up/down voting systems. Not all up votes are equal, nor are all down votes simply because you disagree with the content.

Re: Ask HN: Downvoting

#30

Post by ColinWright »

fogus wrote: post #29

Am I missing something? Isn't one way to fix downvoting to make them subtractive for both parties?

Then if something is on-topic but content-free, why would I bother to flag it? How do I get rewarded for doing the right thing? Why should I not just leave it to someone else?

The idea is to reward correct behavior, whereas your suggestion punishes it.

Post reply on HN