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

291–300 of 475 posts

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

#291

Post by dragonwriter »

amznthrwaway wrote: post #106
Tenoke wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Flagging is for problematic stories. If you follow at all which stories are rejected flagging is used as downvoting on a daily basis unless your definition of 'problematic' is extremely broad.

The notion that HN is well-moderated is bizarre. HN is exceptionally hostile to those who hold beliefs contrary to HN-acceptable norms. If you want to get banned quickly, criticize pg portfolio companies (even politely, with valid criticism), point out that white supremacist and other hate speech is welcomed so long as it is polite; point out that responses to hate speech are _not_ tolerated..... The community here u…

> If you want to get banned quickly, criticize pg portfolio companies

I've done that. Not been banned.

> point out that white supremacist and other hate speech is welcomed so long as it is polite

Well, I mean, aside from being false, that’s also going to often be a specific labelling of something here as “white supremacist” or “hate speech”; flagging exists pretty specifically to deal with content where that description actually applies without sidetracking conversations with incendiary debate about whether it does. So, yeah, comments doing that will be flagged and moderated and, if thet persist, will likely get you banned.

> And candidly, that’s why I’m logged into a banned account to post this.

If it was banned, you couldn’t post from it. So, since you obviously can, I assume you are misrepresenting the facts when you call it a banned account.

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

#292

Post by dang »

pessimizer wrote: post #202
amznthrwaway wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The notion that HN is well-moderated is bizarre. HN is exceptionally hostile to those who hold beliefs contrary to HN-acceptable norms. If you want to get banned quickly, criticize pg portfolio companies (even politely, with valid criticism), point out that white supremacist and other hate speech is welcomed so long as it is polite; point out that responses to hate speech are _not_ tolerated..... The community here u…

You're going to get downvoted and flagged to hell, but I mostly agree with your comment - there was a precipitous quality drop that came with the heavy moderation that people now think of as the identifying characteristic of HN. That being said, I think that after a few egregious missteps (such as the test ban on "politics"), the heavy moderation has been open and kind. I also suspect that there has been some mod med…

Only about 10% of the HN community was anywhere near SV or SF, last time I checked.

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

#293

Post by biasKillsHN »

rurp wrote: post #143
benlivengood wrote: post #40

I've been through several forum deaths. The cause is usually large growth from people with very different mindsets that downvote for essentially political reasons instead of encouraging good discourse. This makes the best people leave in short order. In a sense there's no way to structure a forum to avoid this. Being outnumbered by people who don't value open communication is unpleasant with or without downvoting. Fo…

This matches my experience as well. HN having a reasonably high karma threshold for downvoting was a great decision that guards against a lot of common problems. I think that feature, along with the community as a whole being very mindful about protecting the forum quality, plus Dang being an excellent moderator, have greatly contributed to keeping it strong for many years.

I can't agree on the moderation.

The bias in favor of Apple is extreme. I genuinely don't know if the mods are actively paid off, if Apple astroturfs, or whatever. But it seems those threads are disingenuous. It's impossible to form evidence because good criticism of Apple is often deleted.

Meanwhile other threads are dumpster fires.

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

#294

Post by dang »

kodah wrote: post #172
vict7 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone that just stopped lurking, it's clear downvoting is used primarily as a "disagree" button. Case in point, this comment I'm replying to. I believe they're making a meaningful contribution to this discussion. Yet the downvotes have already commenced.

Take a look at GP's previous comments and their contexts.

Just remember that that will only give the part of the story which is linked to that one username.

Commenters who post grand narratives about why they were banned typically have a long string of past banned accounts. The giveaway is that they never link to them. That would let readers make up their own minds about why they'd gotten banned, and how accurate their story really is.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

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

#295

Post by Koliakis »

phpnode wrote: post #273
disgrunt wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no opinion of Atwood and am unfamiliar with his work. But a single opinion/rant made you lose all respect for a person? I see this sentiment a lot on HN. The fatal opinion minefield.

I saw something earlier today that said (inelegantly paraphrasing) "developers read articles as if they themselves were a compiler, immediately stopping as soon as they reach a sentence they disagree with and then throwing a syntax error" I think the same thing applies here

It's a pattern of behavior that affects a lot of online communities from what I've seen, not just HN, but it's particularly concerning when I see that kind of stance here.

There are a number of writers who I disagree with on an ideological level but whose writings and podcasts I'll read/listen to because of the insight these people can provide - even if often I don't agree with their conclusions. I think it's important to be able to consume opinions that don't match your own and be able to hold them in your head without throwing a fit.

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

#296

Post by thrower123 »

Hiding posts is incredibly useful. It's a good way to keep the blood pressure in an acceptable range.

I keep thinking that a script or an extension to auto-hide stories from blacklisted domains on the front page would greatly improve my experience.

The beauty of hiding, though, is that it only impacts my experience. If people want to discuss and vote up things I find uninteresting, they can have at it, and I don't have to know anything about it.

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

#297

Post by diob »

Hiopl wrote: post #289
crazygringo wrote: post #198

It's kind of amusing that the entire premise of this article is undone by the aside: > update: Apparently it is possible to downvote comments, which I never realized. But while downvotes seem useful for comments where there's a lot more scope for false information, trolling, etc., I'm not sure what the additional value would be for posts -- they're either popular or not, and you can still flag posts that are actively…

I'm also baffled by his position. I often think that downvotes on HN serve to reinforce conformism to an accepted set of values and ideas. Which might be okay if, say, you want to "immunize" a community against racism, sexism or fake information, but isn't great if issues (as in politics or even in tech on a social level) are a lot more nuanced and there might be plenty of room to explore ideas off the beaten path (a…

I agree, I've seen a lot of downvotes simply on things that aren't pro capitalism. I wish comments were used instead.

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

#298

Post by paxys »

Graffur wrote: post #282
rurp wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This matches my experience as well. HN having a reasonably high karma threshold for downvoting was a great decision that guards against a lot of common problems. I think that feature, along with the community as a whole being very mindful about protecting the forum quality, plus Dang being an excellent moderator, have greatly contributed to keeping it strong for many years.

In fact it seems like a no brainer decision. Why should a day 1 account be able to downvote content?

Why should a day 1 account be able to upvote content? They both ultimately have the same impact.

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

#299

Post by chc »

crazygringo wrote: post #198

It's kind of amusing that the entire premise of this article is undone by the aside: > update: Apparently it is possible to downvote comments, which I never realized. But while downvotes seem useful for comments where there's a lot more scope for false information, trolling, etc., I'm not sure what the additional value would be for posts -- they're either popular or not, and you can still flag posts that are actively…

> But while downvotes seem useful for comments where there's a lot more scope for false information, trolling, etc., I'm not sure what the additional value would be for posts -- they're either popular or not, and you can still flag posts that are actively harmful.

I think this ignores the concept of purpose. If you are optimizing for popularity, then this works. But a lot of forums (including Hacker News, theoretically) intend to optimize for relevance, which is contrary to popularity in many cases.

For a really clear-cut example, Kim Kardashian's Instagram posts get far more likes than pretty much any post on Hacker News. Would Hacker News be better if it were replaced with a redirect to Kim Kardashian's Instagram feed? In terms of how popular the content is, this is an unambiguous yes. But that would not be a better Hacker News, it would just be more popular because you've replaced Hacker News with something completely different.

That's an extreme example, but the same applies for content that's more relevant than Kim Kardashian's instagram feed. Popularity measures breadth of appeal more than anything else, so if you're trying to appeal to specific interests or cultivate some kind of niche content, popularity can be a negative. Downvotes can function as a way for a site's userbase to say, "Whoa, this is not what this place is supposed to be about, even if it is broadly appealing."

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

#300

Post by tediousdemise »

BrandonM wrote: post #262
josephg wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t use downvotes to signal disagreement. It goes against the implicit and explicit guidelines of HN. And it drags HN closer to reddit. Even if you see other people using downvotes for disagreement, that doesn’t make it ok for you to do the same. Downvotes are for when people violate the norms and values of our community without thoughtfulness or self awareness. The difference is subtle sometimes, but your comment…

I use downvotes to signal disagreement when, from my perspective, someone is giving bad advice, not accurately representing the truth, speculating in an unproductive way, distracting from the discussion with completely unfounded claims, etc. I personally think of "disagreement" as a continuum, where one end is pretty close to my own view, and the other is absolutely abhorrent or incoherent. Certainly part of that con…

> I use downvotes to signal disagreement when, from my perspective, someone is giving bad advice, not accurately representing the truth, speculating in an unproductive way, distracting from the discussion with completely unfounded claims, etc.

This seems to be a really wide net for downvotes, and almost certainly won't match other people's use cases for downvoting. I don't think downvoting should be open to interpretation like this, hence why I think it should be removed. The alternative? Just don't upvote, or flag if something is truly inappropriate.

Post reply on HN