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

331–340 of 475 posts

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

#331

Post by [deleted] »

benlivengood wrote: post #260
downandout wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't actually know. I am who I am, and have been responding to things in the same way since I arrived on the site. I took a lot of flack for criticizing GDPR, which I agree with in principle but believe was very poorly implemented. Also people seem to have confused me for a Trump supporter, even though I am middle-of-the-road politically - which is why I suspect that I get many automatic downvotes regardless of th…

> I try to call things as I see them, and any criticism of left-leaning principles/programs/policies on here - even the most misguided ones - tends to meet with instant, harsh rebuke. Something to consider; is it a harsh rebuke or just other people calling it as they see it?

[deleted]

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

#332

Post by ctdonath »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #258
TheManInThePub wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Frankly, I couldn't agree with this more. I've seen intelligent and insightful HN posts down voted simply because they went against the status-quo. If this is allowed to go on, people will be afraid of making controversial (but intelligent) posts, and this place will become another reddit.

I've noticed that when I comment against the status quo, my comments quickly dip to -2 or lower from rapid fire downvotes, then slowly tick upward into positive territory over time as the more patient readers come through. It would be interesting to see if time-weighting the votes somehow could improve the signal. Maybe give less weight to someone who rapid-fire downvotes comments faster than they could possibly read…

Long wanted to see “spark graphs” [Tufte] next to vote totals, indicating the dynamics of up/down votes over time. I’ve had comments generate lots of activity, yet votes balance out to something mundane (like +2) despite wild fluctuations.

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

#333

Post by freedomben »

wvenable wrote: post #145
freedomben wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that flagging has value, but it is grossly misused to suppress discussions that are on topic but are outside of the overton window. Generally speaking I think HN is wonderful, and if staying wonderful means we have to tolerate censorship, I'll gladly make that trade, but I do wish people had thicker skin (that's a problem on all sides by the way).

Individual comments are rarely flagged for anything other than outright spam or harassment. I browse with "show dead" turned on. I have seen entire heated topics killed but that kills both sides of the argument equally. What value is a 500-comment talk-over-each-other argument, fundamentally about politics even if on-topic, on this site? I doesn't seem like something we should waste time on.

I agree with you, my opposition is actually regarding posts. I have been active on a number of posts over the last couple of years that were very much on topic but were on controversial issues, and they will get flagged to death after being on the front page for a few minutes, and at that point further conversation is dead and the post sinks into irrelevance.

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

#334

Post by mattmanser »

anaerobicover wrote: post #242
DangitBobby wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is one of those things that I did not realize kills discourse until I experienced a community that mainly posts serious content and discussion. Reddit now is particularly bad as each thread is sea of quips, one-liners, and trashtalk which pretty much floods out the pond of interesting discussion. "Funny" can be a great thing, but if that's all anyone ever tries to offer, it becomes very tiresome.

I agree. Cheap/stupid jokes mostly get downvoted here, and it's one of the things I like about HN!

To be fair to reddit, there are plenty of subreddits that have similar policies (e.g. /r/science). It works most of the time apart from when a particular post ends up x-posted or on /r/popular or something similar.

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

#335

Post by huffmsa »

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.

I've long held that you should have to reply to the comment when downvoting. Even if it's just a "no", that's better than the ability to hide a comment you don't agree with

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

#336

Post by bitshiftfaced »

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 think people tend to downvote out of negative emotion but more likely upvote out of genuine interest. All it takes is one bad actor to downvote a comment early and it may never again gain enough visibility to get the position it actually deserves.

On the other hand, the absence of upvoting keeps the comment at a neutral level. Its speed of losing visibility can't be unfairly accelerated, and so it has a chance at competing with comments of the same level.

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

#337

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

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…

> the accepted HN narrative.

I'd argue HN isn't a cohesive whole, there are factions / demographics what have you, along with timing. I've seen comments get pounded and even flagged to a death only to later see them revived and constructive conversation below.

I agree with you though, down votes are a net-negative.

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

#338

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

FalconSensei wrote: post #320
rcurry wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That's the horse of twenty-somethings, and their "older" cohort, who think being a jerk is funny. I've definitely done that way too much here at times, oops.

Still, it falls on the creators and maintainers of HN to do something about it.

I'd be interested to read any discussion in suport of down votes from the crew who run the site.

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

#339

Post by peterfield »

Like most comments here - I am a bit divided about the relevance and even the rationale of this article. That said it has given me a different twist on a sentiment I have been dealing with for a long time: I'm French but have emigrated to the English-speaking world 15+years ago (NZ, AU, USA). I have found the whole experience very challenging in terms of career management. Assessing my own progresses is something I really struggle with. For years, I was sub-conscientiously blaming my language skills (I have the worst French accent ever - when I meet new people they often ask me "when did you land" as I sound like a Tourist in a city I've lived for years lol).

I have since acquired more confidence language-wise, but it did not solve my 'confusion' (a la Travolta 404). I realized that what I was lacking was the negative feedback loop. I haven't had a long career in France before emigrating, but I had been through a large variety of student/casual jobs and a few short term engineering and project/program management roles. Enough to get accustomed to a French "professional context" in which I recall having professional reviews where negative feedback was given formally, and open discussions where employees would criticize the proposal made by a manager, or when a supplier was late in delivering - loud words would be exchanged on the phone. I haven't seen any of these in the past 15 years. Political correctness rules. Last time my temper took over and I inadvertently let a bit of my irritation be heard on the phone with a late supplier - they literally clammed down and it just added to the late schedule another 10 days of silence from them until they delivered. To quote Jeff Atwood - this is exactly the feeling I have at work sometime: "If a post has zero upvotes, does that mean it’s bad? incorrect? uninteresting? mediocre? There’s no way to tell, because zero has multiple meanings. [...] Downvotes give you the critically important ability to distinguish between the good, the bad, and the ugly. Without downvotes, how can you possibly tell the difference between a post that is harmless but uninteresting, and one that is actually wrong or harmful?"

Am I hallucinating ? I'd be curious to here about other emigrants/multicultural peeps' experience here.

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

#340

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

chc wrote: post #299
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, theoretical…

> 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."

Can be. I'd argue it would appear to me down votes here are overwhelming used for simple disagreement.

It's fun to discuss what a thing could be, spherical cow in a vacuum, it's probably more useful to discuss how that thing actually gets used and how each of us weight the value of those uses.

Post reply on HN