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

341–350 of 475 posts

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

#341

Post by cgriswald »

confidantlake wrote: post #328
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.

There was an article about bad service at apple stores. I commented that I had mostly positive experiences. Was downvoted.

There’s a similar dynamic on Nextdoor in my neighborhood. You’re basically not allowed to disagree with the OP. Commenters will say things like “this isn’t the place for it” without addressing the content or actual appropriateness. Usually you’ll be drown out by a bunch of “compassionate” posts or stupid questions[0] as well.

If you want to disagree with someone you can start your own post and many of the same people will “protect” your post from disagreement as well. It’s basically impossible to have an actual discussion in that environment.

[0] - Stupid as in the answer to their question is literally in the text of the post they’re responding to in the first place.

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

#342

Post by zw123456 »

I never comment on HN anymore, because, ironically, a site ostensibly promoting innovative thinking actually discourages it with mechanized "group think". And ironically I am breaking my rule to never comment, on the completely off chance the observation might sink in. FYI, the down button is right there, don't hesitate, you wouldn't dare want to ever take input that you don't completely agree with.

Last post ever, no really this time :)

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

#343

Post by ypeterholmes »

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…

Dang. I've been on here years looking for a downvote capability. Apparently you need ~500 karma and I have 200.

Any upvotes would be greatly appreciated.

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

#344

Post by elastolin »

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, but masks don't work and IT IS just like the flu. That's an objectively true statement.

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

#345

Post by pseudalopex »

noizejoy wrote: post #314
benlivengood wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

The Outstanding filter seems to just show Insightful and Interesting comments.

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

#346

Post by crispyambulance »

rhizome wrote: post #191
LinuxBender wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've had similar experiences on ServerFault part of StachExchange . If I simply answer a question with the correct technical answer, my answer is basically ignored. If I take that exact same answer and add a bold title, some cute paragraph formatting, some no-format text boxes, add some flowery wording like I am giving a Ted Talk, then people love my answers. So that is what I do and why I rarely answer questions any…

I feel like a lot more people qualify to do metamoderation in the SO network than ever do it. This is essentially sabotage in the form of benign neglect.

It's true, but the gamification and rules, IMHO, attract personalities that take that stuff really, REALLY, seriously. Even to the point of being absurd.

I suppose it's a kind of power trip to go around and mark questions as "duplicate" for even the most superficial nonsense-- I am looking at you, @gnat !

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

#347

Post by cgriswald »

klyrs wrote: post #253
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…

I dunno about everybody else, but there were about 15 years where every single story had several trolls commenting purely for the purpose of dropping a racial slur. Meta-moderate for long enough, and you could occasionally earn 5 karma, which could easily get blown on downvoting stupid shit from a single story. It was a cesspool, and I think a lot of people left because of that. They started a really good thing with…

I’m not a fan of meta moderation. It lacks context. I upvoted or downvoted for reasons and without knowing that reason how can someone determine whether that was appropriate? When I metamoderated I was extremely forgiving for the same reason. Unless it was clear abuse I “okayed” it.

Incidentally at some point I stopped getting moderation points even though I was a frequent meta moderator. Whether that was due to meta moderation of my mods, I don’t know.

There were rumors of a blacklist and there was a thread which was closed down critical of either an admin or the site. I participated in the thread rather moderately IIRC, but that was around the time I never saw another mod point.

At least on HN, dang will tell you what he didn’t like about your behavior. dang is also outwardly cool with disagreeing with him, which isn’t true with everyone.

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

#348

Post by sizt »

huffmsa wrote: post #335
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.

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

Narcissists love a system of no downvotes, and other forms of passive aggressive, group think.

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

#349

Post by BelmundoRegal »

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 have come to see this "fading" as highlighting. Here as well as in the world at large. To be fair, most of the time the downvoted comment here is trash in one way or another, but sometimes it's gold. Often times it's neither and should be left alone.

See also ; https://journalofcontroversialideas.org/

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

#350

Post by crispyambulance »

diob wrote: post #297
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, I've seen a lot of downvotes simply on things that aren't pro capitalism. I wish comments were used instead.

I'm not so worried about it.

There's certain number of "tar-baby" subjects/opinions that can get someone downvoted on HN really quick... like suggesting Peter Thiel is an asshole, or saying anything negative about crazy libertarians.

But HN is ALL about discussion. It's a relatively safe place to float an idea and hear some provocative opinions. The techno-libertarians don't actually bite.

Stackoverflow, on the other hand, has higher stakes. People are trying to figure something out at work and running into a brick wall. If they make the mistake of posting an earnest question they make themselves vulnerable and have a good chance of being humiliated and made to feel like shit by some smug prick who's having a bad day. You really need to put on some psychological armor before attempting to question or answer on Stackoverflow. It's an intrinsically toxic environment.

Post reply on HN