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

311–320 of 475 posts

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

#311

Post by rcurry »

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 with you 100%, I love HN and have been here for years but the downvoting feature disgusts me. Either allow a post or don’t, but this weird “fading” of someone’s post just because some people don’t agree with what someone has to say strikes me as petty and cheap. HN should be bigger than that.

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

#312

Post by dang »

biasKillsHN wrote: post #293
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.

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.

People with the opposite view see the opposite "extreme" bias. It's basically entirely in the eye of the beholder.

What's odd is how common it is, and how absolutely people are convinced that their particular strain of these contradictory generalizations is the accurate one.

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

#313

Post by josephg »

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 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.

Yeah, I like this perspective but I think there's two axes we can separate a little. One axis is disagreement. (I agree with you I disagree with you). the other axis is effort / coherence. (I'm going to invest significant effort to clearly articulate my point of view I'm going to make a flippant off-handed comment).

Disagreement alone isn't the problem - I've had some lovely conversations on HN with people I disagree with. Eg, a couple weeks ago I had this interesting exchange[1] talking about RMS on the FSF board. But the conversation worked because everyone was careful and articulate. When someone says something I disagree with, but they say it in a thoughtful, well articulated way, I learn something new.

There's probably more factors at play, but as a rule of thumb I suppose downvotes are in the low effort + strong disagree quadrant. In that zone I feel like there's no implied intent to even talk it through. And absent conversation, why are we even here?

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26611767

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

#314

Post by noizejoy »

benlivengood wrote: post #167
CDRdude wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think slashdot’s voting system was well equipped to avoid that problem, but they faded anyway. Maybe it was the redesign? I think many of their innovations in 1999 would go a long way to resolve political downvoting today—-new accounts were unable to vote on comments, you were unable to vote and comment in the same posts, metamoderation to ensure fairness, and up or downvotes having to fit categories like ‘insightf…

Slashdot got popular and the insightful comments got drowned out by Funny+5 because it's low effort karma building that feels like being popular. I learned my lesson and try to only inject humor into otherwise useful comments on HN.

My memory is fuzzy on my slashdot days, but wasn’t there a way to filter the funny suff?

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

#315

Post by stevenhuang »

paxys wrote: post #298
Graffur wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I imagine it promotes discourse by encouraging discussion instead of shallow dismissals by downvoting.

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

#316

Post by NobodyNada »

jodrellblank wrote: post #92
NobodyNada wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry for the confusion, I was referencing how it would be unusual to hear SE staff today talking about why downvoting is an important quality-control feature and how it can be made more useful and more helpful for new users, rather than just condemning downvotes as hostile. In fact, the blog post you linked was at the forefront of my mind as an example of SE staff not "getting it." Stack Overflow's moderation system…

> " In fairness: within the last year or two they finally seem to have hired some staff members who finally get it and are taking steps towards actually fixing the site's moderation problems. " That is such a time frame to choose; right in the middle of it, 1 year 6 months ago, the Monica incident happened[1]. Do you mean before that or after that? In summary, StackOverflow said they were discussing a code of conduct…

Yeah, I’m referring to after all of that. 2020 felt so much longer than a year, so my time interval was way off.

I was referencing stuff like the closure changes [1], review queue redesign [2], and the updates to the “ask” page [3]. Again, I haven’t been on SO much lately so I don’t now how well that’s been working out or how receptive they’ve been to Meta feedback, but it’s reassuring to see they’re finally focusing on parts of the site that have needed it desperately for so many years. Additionally, they seem to be doing better about listening to Meta (at least compared to the “0.015%” reign of terror).

[1]: https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/394871/upcoming-fea...

[2]: https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/346901/improving-th...

[3]: https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/344513/the-new-ask-...

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

#317

Post by biasKillsHN »

dang wrote: post #312
biasKillsHN wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

People with the opposite view see the opposite "extreme" bias. It's basically entirely in the eye of the beholder. What's odd is how common it is, and how absolutely people are convinced that their particular strain of these contradictory generalizations is the accurate one.

That's not what I'm referring to.

I see political topics better debated and I'm radical.

It's just Apple comment threads. You know dang.

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

#318

Post by FalconSensei »

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…

> Peers express disapproval and disagreement by commenting within the post. As I am doing precisely right now. ;)

Exactly. And this is actually something that I like about Twitter, and hate about Reddit. Don't like what I post? Reply and say it.

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

#319

Post by ardfard »

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 (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.....

I don't think this is true, or I just don't see any evidence it. Take a look a this HN yesterday thread, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26782031. Neither PG nor his YC companies are immune to criticism.

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

#320

Post by FalconSensei »

rcurry wrote: post #311
Hiopl wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 with you 100%, I love HN and have been here for years but the downvoting feature disgusts me. Either allow a post or don’t, but this weird “fading” of someone’s post just because some people don’t agree with what someone has to say strikes me as petty and cheap. HN should be bigger than that.

And to prove your point, your comment is faded with no replies, even though you didn't say anything wrong, but only expressed your opinion.
Post reply on HN