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

The value of downvoting, or, how Hacker News gets it wrong (2009)

stackoverflow.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 475 posts

Re: The value of downvoting, or, how Hacker News gets it wrong (2009)

#21

Post by Macha »

happytoexplain wrote: post #7

>I can’t recall ever seeing a single negative voted comment in all the times I’ve visited Hacker News That's interesting. I wonder how that could be the case.

While the treshold for downvoting has increased since 2009, the threshold hasn't increased to the same level that the number of active users (and therefore votes) have, so I would guess proportionally way more of the community has access to downvotes today than in 2009.

Also, I think in those days you did see vote numbers, but you didn't see the big obvious greying out of downvoted comments that exists today.

Re: The value of downvoting, or, how Hacker News gets it wrong (2009)

#22

Post by threatofrain »

ad404b8a372f2b9 wrote: post #10

Interesting, making downvotes costly seems like a good system. Though downvotes seem to work pretty well as-is for HN, I rarely see dead comments that were killed by downvotes rather than anti-spam features. If we take HN as reddit 2.0, what would be HN 2.0 I wonder? If I were the one to make it I'd create a system to promote the comments of people with professional expertise on the subject being discussed. HN has mo…

I think if people want the next level of quality on technical discussion, there needs to be a gatekeeping mechanism which is concerned with technical competency.

I would also expect such a place to have a magnitude or two fewer people.

Re: The value of downvoting, or, how Hacker News gets it wrong (2009)

#23

Post by dang »

Getting it wrong for 12 years now:

The Value of Downvoting, Or, How Hacker News Gets It Wrong (2009) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25633668 - Jan 2021 (1 comment)

10 Years In, Was He Right? “Value of Downvoting; How HN Gets It Wrong” - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23409231 - June 2020 (1 comment)

The Value of Downvoting, or, How Hacker News Gets It Wrong (2009) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13325726 - Jan 2017 (12 comments)

The Value of Downvoting or How Hacker News Gets It Wrong (2009) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10875619 - Jan 2016 (36 comments)

Reddit's Discussion about HN - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=508801 - March 2009 (24 comments)

The Value of Downvoting, or, How Hacker News Gets It Wrong - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=507948 - March 2009 (114 comments)

Re: The value of downvoting, or, how Hacker News gets it wrong (2009)

#24

Post by polytely »

ad404b8a372f2b9 wrote: post #10

Interesting, making downvotes costly seems like a good system. Though downvotes seem to work pretty well as-is for HN, I rarely see dead comments that were killed by downvotes rather than anti-spam features. If we take HN as reddit 2.0, what would be HN 2.0 I wonder? If I were the one to make it I'd create a system to promote the comments of people with professional expertise on the subject being discussed. HN has mo…

Maybe downvotes should cost some karma? might be a trigger to think before downvoting

Re: The value of downvoting, or, how Hacker News gets it wrong (2009)

#25

Post by wincy »

ameister14 wrote: post #16

I think one obvious problem with downvoting where downvotes automatically hide content is that it creates echo chambers. The downvote button is definitely a 'disagree' button here and I think it's not really conducive to great discussions. Then again, this isn't really a forum - it's transitory comments about the news of the day. Perhaps the argument is that there shouldn't be substantive discussion here in the first…

I’m not sure I agree. I tend to say things that are somewhat controversial on HN, and if I said them in San Francisco I’d be liable to be tarred and feathered, being a Libertarian from Kansas, but I try to be diplomatic and haven’t yet had a comment that’s gotten hidden. I think people are fairly charitable as long as you’re presenting a cogent argument.

I always show dead comments and honestly, people aren’t missing out on much. To get your comment dead in my experience you have to either be extremely inflammatory or just spout absolute nonsense.

Re: The value of downvoting, or, how Hacker News gets it wrong (2009)

#26

Post by Miraste »

jerrac wrote: post #19

I initially loved the idea of voting posts up and down. Thanks to seeing how it actually works on SO and here, well, I am not much of a fan anymore. At the very least, if I ever implemented it myself, I'd require that people explain why they are voting up, or voting down, before they could vote. And I'd not limit users from being able to vote until they magically get to the right amount of "karma". Without requiring…

> Not a very good way to encourage a diverse culture

I'd guess that's the point - giving power over visibility to users who've proved themselves in line with the forum zeitgeist helps maintain a site's culture as-is and prevent it "diversifying" into Smaller Facebook #50691.

Re: The value of downvoting, or, how Hacker News gets it wrong (2009)

#27

Post by notafraudster »

elhudy wrote: post #8

The glaring issue in this article (which I couldn't bring myself to finish) is that he equates downvoting to "evil or incorrect post(s)". Which would be true in an ideal world, but the reality becomes downvotes are equivalent to "I disagree with you". If plentiful downvoting is allowed, discourse becomes a popularity contest. Fortunately most of the experienced users here seem to understand this and reserve their dow…

I tend to downvote at the nexus of stuff I disagree with + expressed in an unproductive, rude, spammy, abusive, or flip manner. It's certainly true that when a flippant post is something I agree with I'm more likely to elide on by it. I assume most people do the same thing.

Re: The value of downvoting, or, how Hacker News gets it wrong (2009)

#29

Post by s1artibartfast »

ericmay wrote: post #13

I really like downvoting where you lose one of your past upvotes in order to downvote. It's a nice little filter that people who care about how many upvotes they have won't use, and puts an end to some amount of frivolous downvoting. In a meta way, you kind of have to use a little bit of your own point capital to downvote something, so if you're highly upvoted by the community then calling BS on something is easier f…

I like the idea of only showing the number of up boats and when her user is negative, and possibly taking action at some point.

And avoid users speaking to the audience opposed to directly addressing the parent comment

Hacker news gates some functionality based on accumulated Votes, so maybe once you hit the necessary threshold it is hidden

Re: The value of downvoting, or, how Hacker News gets it wrong (2009)

#30

Post by ad404b8a372f2b9 »

minikites wrote: post #4

>It’s pretty clear now that the broken windows theory applies to community sites as well. The theory is that minor forms of bad behavior encourage worse ones: that a neighborhood with lots of graffiti and broken windows becomes one where robberies occur. I was living in New York when Giuliani introduced the reforms that made the broken windows theory famous, and the transformation was miraculous. The success of "brok…

I have no opinion on New York and its implementation of the theory but I think it's indeed very clear that the theory applies to community management.

I manage an instant messaging community of about 10000 stem professionals and you can see negative community feedback loops develop or die down in real time depending on how you act on them. It's evident new members take in the vibe when they arrive and act to reinforce good or bad trends. If you let people make crass jokes, soon they're posting rude comments then insulting each others. If you let people post memes about technical topics, soon it's random tiktok videos, then it's porn. If you let a regular member go off on a newbie who asks a bad question, the next thing you know people are bullying newcomers left and right.

All I wanted was to build a nice virtual gathering spot and meet cool people but now I have to play fascist because the feedback effect is so strong.

Post reply on HN