New Hacker News Guideline: Avoid Gratuitous Negativity • Hacker News Board

Re: New Hacker News Guideline: Avoid Gratuitous Negativity

#261

Post by mreiland » Fri, Apr 03, 2015, 9:42 PM UTC

cpayne wrote: post #243

mreiland wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think you nailed the real problem, which is that people have become so quick to write off anyone who ruffles their feathers at all. I'm quick to write off people and I won't apologize for it. I have better things to do with my time than to give everyone the same amount of time and respect. If HN has decided to be touchy feely than this most certainly isn't the place for me. I prefer actual discourse where bullshi…

(For me) the kicker in your response was: than to give everyone the same amount of time and respect Who then, is worth of your time and/or respect? What is your criteria? Fine by me to have your opinion. But at least be able to back it up with some substance.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZ017D_JOPY&t=3m15s

But I honestly fall into the other camp that believes respect should be given freely.

BUT

that lasts until you open your mouth and say something stupid. I've had "discussions" with people about whether or not MAtz Ruby had a GIL.

You don't get my respect for holding that opinion and I have better things to do with my time than worry about your feelings.

There's a clear difference between someone with a differing opinion and someone with a flawed thought process. I'm ok with a person telling me C++ is the most horrible thing since sliced bread despite my love for the language. I'm not ok with someone telling me allocation/deallocation in C++ is slower than C# because some article on the internet talked about allocation without going into the cost of deallocation.

One of those is understandable, the other is flat out wrong and if you choose to hold to that opinion then you're going to get dismissed as someone whose thought process is too faulty to trust.

And I have better things to do with my time.

Re: New Hacker News Guideline: Avoid Gratuitous Negativity

#262

Post by bane » Fri, Apr 03, 2015, 9:42 PM UTC

SamReidHughes wrote: post #211

bane wrote: post #95

You know what, I think this is a good idea. I definitely get into "I'm the world's biggest asshole today" mode too frequently. Maybe if I get called out on it more it'll help make me a better person. I know the rest of the civil discourse rules here on HN have helped me become more thoughtful in other modes of interaction.

> I definitely get into "I'm the world's biggest asshole today" mode too frequently. No you don't.

Well, at least we can always kaizen our way to betterment?

Re: New Hacker News Guideline: Avoid Gratuitous Negativity

#263

Post by brudgers » Fri, Apr 03, 2015, 9:43 PM UTC

dsugarman wrote: post #15

I think the downvote functionality is holding back the utility of HN more than anything else. It is grossly overused and very rarely for guidelines violations like it was designed for. Most people use to show they disagree with a comment. It's an awful experience and is the main fuel in a negative feedback loop that travels with users from thread to thread.

I have a difference of opinion on the matter of downvotes. A long time ago I decided to try to treat downvotes on my own posts as editorial feedback. In the best case, it just meant I was unclear. In the worst, case I said something stupid. In between there are cases where I knowingly wrote something likely to get downvotes.

I believe downvoting a comment that I disagree with is often far better for HN than expressing my passionate "well informed" opinion. Downvoting prevents my inclination toward "trolling lite" in the form of explaining how someone is obviously wrong for the sake of correcting the internet.

To put it another way, downvotes are for downvoting. Downvoting and moving on is the right choice whenever it proxies the possibility of worse behavior. A downvote can be a way of mocking out a flamewar or general meanness.

Re: New Hacker News Guideline: Avoid Gratuitous Negativity

#264

Post by ZenoArrow » Fri, Apr 03, 2015, 9:43 PM UTC

mreiland wrote: post #204

staunch wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you nailed the real problem, which is that people have become so quick to write off anyone who ruffles their feathers at all. Drew Houston describes the HN feedback he received for Dropbox as all the motivation he needed to keep going. He also explained that he knew it was a hit because of how many people were saying negative things. Today though, any truly critical comment means you're either a hater or a tr…

> I think you nailed the real problem, which is that people have become so quick to write off anyone who ruffles their feathers at all. I'm quick to write off people and I won't apologize for it. I have better things to do with my time than to give everyone the same amount of time and respect. If HN has decided to be touchy feely than this most certainly isn't the place for me. I prefer actual discourse where bullshi…

Your post perfectly shows part of the problem, which is... you can give it, but you can't take it. If you're not prepared to give people the benefit of the doubt, why would you expect something different in return?

Re: New Hacker News Guideline: Avoid Gratuitous Negativity

#265

Post by mreiland » Fri, Apr 03, 2015, 9:44 PM UTC

MartinCron wrote: post #259

mreiland wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think you nailed the real problem, which is that people have become so quick to write off anyone who ruffles their feathers at all. I'm quick to write off people and I won't apologize for it. I have better things to do with my time than to give everyone the same amount of time and respect. If HN has decided to be touchy feely than this most certainly isn't the place for me. I prefer actual discourse where bullshi…

shit you guys, can't you go with the reading my comment charitably or will you hit that downvote button again, thereby showing your hypocrisy? The whole "why won't you be tolerant of my intolerance?" paradox again. Cute.

No, hypocrisy.

You don't get to pick and choose who to interpret charitably unless you want to be a hypocrite.

But here's the thing.

That idea is valid even though your dislike of my post is going to drive you to continue attacking me unnecessarily.

and that is why I have a tendency to dismiss people.

Re: New Hacker News Guideline: Avoid Gratuitous Negativity

#266

Post by Jimmy » Fri, Apr 03, 2015, 9:44 PM UTC

dang wrote: post #131

baddox wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think reasonable people can disagree about what adds substance to a comment.

Oh, no question. But by "getting the idea" I mean the intent. Reasonable people are always going to differ on the precise meaning of these terms. That doesn't need to be a problem. If everyone makes a good-faith effort to avoid gratuitous negativity however they best understand that, HN will be fine.

>But by "getting the idea" I mean the intent.

I'm suspicious of the intent. That's why I want a more formal criteria.

Re: New Hacker News Guideline: Avoid Gratuitous Negativity

#267

Post by mreiland » Fri, Apr 03, 2015, 9:44 PM UTC

ZenoArrow wrote: post #264

mreiland wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think you nailed the real problem, which is that people have become so quick to write off anyone who ruffles their feathers at all. I'm quick to write off people and I won't apologize for it. I have better things to do with my time than to give everyone the same amount of time and respect. If HN has decided to be touchy feely than this most certainly isn't the place for me. I prefer actual discourse where bullshi…

Your post perfectly shows part of the problem, which is... you can give it, but you can't take it. If you're not prepared to give people the benefit of the doubt, why would you expect something different in return?

You missed my point, have a good day.

Re: New Hacker News Guideline: Avoid Gratuitous Negativity

#268

Post by TheLoneWolfling » Fri, Apr 03, 2015, 9:45 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #229

zk00006 wrote: post #50

Given the fact that people get points for their answers, there is already bias towards positive and encouraging comments in hacker news. Notice how the comments start positive and later slowly add the information just to be "safe". Of course not in all cases. From my experience: if I give shallow positive comment I am more likely to get positive points, but strict negative and often deeper comment is down voted. This…

That sounds like a good thing.

It may sound like it on the surface, but I don't think it is a good thing in the long run.

There's a fine line between making a community and making a herd. Upvoting / downvoting encourages both, the problem being trying to have enough to encourage the first without enough of the second to lose the community you've built.

Re: New Hacker News Guideline: Avoid Gratuitous Negativity

#269

Post by mreiland » Fri, Apr 03, 2015, 9:47 PM UTC

dang wrote: post #252

mreiland wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think you nailed the real problem, which is that people have become so quick to write off anyone who ruffles their feathers at all. I'm quick to write off people and I won't apologize for it. I have better things to do with my time than to give everyone the same amount of time and respect. If HN has decided to be touchy feely than this most certainly isn't the place for me. I prefer actual discourse where bullshi…

There may be a misunderstanding here. This guideline isn't about who you "write off"—obviously you can have whatever opinion you want to—and it certainly isn't about giving everyone the same amount of time and respect. It's about maintaining a minimal level of respect when commenting, for the sake of the community as a whole. As for time, you always have the option of giving people zero of it simply by not commenting…

I responded to the idea behind a specific statement, I did not make a generalized observation about the guideline.

I even quoted the idea I was responding to. Perhaps you should practice some of that charitable interpretation.

Re: New Hacker News Guideline: Avoid Gratuitous Negativity

#270

Post by tptacek » Fri, Apr 03, 2015, 9:47 PM UTC

lexcorvus wrote: post #250

tptacek wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does your opinion about Recurse's financial aid program have to do with whether their community guidelines are good? Either the isms rule is good or it isn't; its validity does not depend on you agreeing with the rest of their actions.

Their guidelines are hypocritical, i.e., bad. To spell it out explicitly: the -isms rule is probably fine as far as it goes, but if HN is going to be inspired by the Recurse Center's policies, it should go a step further and officially discourage the Recurse Center's brand of pious discrimination as well.

How could this sentiment possibly have anything to do with Hacker News? Much to my disappointment, Hacker News doesn't offer financial aid to commenters.