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

111–120 of 475 posts

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

#111

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

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

#112

Post by the_lonely_road »

joering2 wrote: post #73
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…

Would actually like to see a list of largest karma-wise HN members who left. By leaving I would say over 180 days inactive. Dang can you post the result please: SELECT hn_name, hn_karma, hn_last_active FROM comments WHERE TIMESTAMPDIFF(DAY, hn_last_active, NOW()) > 180 ORDER BY hn_karma DESC LIMIT 100

Be the change that you want to see in the universe. HN has a super easy to use API and I have downloaded the entire history of the site before for a past project. If you don't want to do the leg work yourself I am positive that the data set is out there for download somewhere if you google around.

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

#113

Post by jonnycomputer »

dang wrote: post #23

Getting it wrong for 12 years now: The Value of Downvoting, Or, How Hacker News Gets It Wrong (2009) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25633668 - Jan 2021 (1 comment) 10 Years In, Was He Right? “Value of Downvoting; How HN Gets It Wrong” - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23409231 - June 2020 (1 comment) The Value of Downvoting, or, How Hacker News Gets It Wrong (2009) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=…

It is still wrong. But even brilliant people/groups/institutions can get it stubbornly wrong. Let us say that HN thrives despite the disutility of the downvoting regime.

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

#114

Post by wmichelin »

amadeuspagel wrote: post #101

> We’ve lost half the potential information. 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. Having downvotes doesn't fix this problem. You still loose information. If a post has zero upvotes, does that mean nobody cares, or a lot of people love it, and the same number hate it? The only site that gets this right is yo…

I believe they're playing around with removing dislikes

Source: https://www.theverge.com/2021/3/30/22358992/youtube-hiding-d...

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

#115

Post by austincheney »

minimaxir wrote: post #100
austincheney wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN definitely moves in the proper direction on this one. The ONLY purpose of down votes is to suppress conversation. If, contrarily, a user wished to provide a form of disagreement they would do so with a reply. Why? Because votes are a means of action to express an appeal to agreement/disagreement. I remember pointing this out once on Reddit, before I deleted my account there, and it temporarily changed peoples' beh…

> The ONLY purpose of down votes is to suppress conversation. This assumes all conversation is equal quality. That particular point has never been true in social media, and has actually become worse post-2016, with increased partisanship and bad faith arguing. It's impossible to run a high-quality discussion forum without some sort of check on bad behavior. That said, it's up for debate whether downvotes are the best…

First, your point implies down votes are a check on bad behavior as opposed to a form of disagreement. I suspect many users use social media voting for a variety of different reasons.

Secondly, there are two solutions to that problem:

1. If you believe the environment, group, or social body of a particular conversing venue is heavily biased, whether deliberate or not, you don't have to participate there. Simply leave.

2. If you believe a particular user is deliberately exercising some form of bad behavior or displays an inability to follow the conversation you don't have to reply to them. Simply let it die.

For example: whether or not I ever liked or voted for President Trump I would never spend time on Reddit at r/theDonald because I know conversation there is biased like a form of cult worship. Why bother conversing where you are not allowed to disagree on any matter?

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

#116

Post by jonnycomputer »

josephg wrote: post #107
tediousdemise wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a huge fan of no downvote button, so much so in fact that I don't think users of any karma level should be able to do it. Why concentrate this power into the hands of a privileged few? It's a representative system where we vote certain users into high karma, but they needn't return any favors and can subsequently downvote things that are otherwise suitable for the platform. Privilege can, and will, be abused in f…

I feel like downvoting on HN is a way of saying “No. We don’t behave like that here”. It’s one of our community’s tools for preserving, teaching and enforcing our values with newcomers. Yes, it’s open to abuse. But it fills an important social function. And from that perspective, of course it’s limited to people who’ve been involved in the community awhile.

Most people just use it to signal disagreement. I just did so now.

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

#117

Post by MaxBarraclough »

latortuga wrote: post #90
gwbas1c wrote: post #74

I don't know if these are popular opinions or not: 1: I really wish I could downvote Hacker News articles. 2: I really wish there was some friction to downvoting. Perhaps something like choosing among: disagree, factually wrong, mean, incoherent Regarding the downvoting of articles: For awhile I used to see a regular pattern of weird articles on the front page. The discussion would then predictably involve a mod defe…

Didn't slashdot have a feature kind of like this? Reasons why something was upvoted or downvoted alongside their score.

Correct. SoylentNews goes one step further, and adds +0 agree and -0 disagree. I'm not sure if such votes have any real effect.

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

#118

Post by elboru »

amadeuspagel wrote: post #101

> We’ve lost half the potential information. 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. Having downvotes doesn't fix this problem. You still loose information. If a post has zero upvotes, does that mean nobody cares, or a lot of people love it, and the same number hate it? The only site that gets this right is yo…

> The only site that gets this right is youtube: It shows both likes and dislikes.

That might change soon: https://mobile.twitter.com/YouTube/status/137694248659415040...

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

#119

Post by minimaxir »

the_lonely_road wrote: post #112
joering2 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would actually like to see a list of largest karma-wise HN members who left. By leaving I would say over 180 days inactive. Dang can you post the result please: SELECT hn_name, hn_karma, hn_last_active FROM comments WHERE TIMESTAMPDIFF(DAY, hn_last_active, NOW()) > 180 ORDER BY hn_karma DESC LIMIT 100

Be the change that you want to see in the universe. HN has a super easy to use API and I have downloaded the entire history of the site before for a past project. If you don't want to do the leg work yourself I am positive that the data set is out there for download somewhere if you google around.

Data analysis note: the public datasets only have submissions and comments, and just because a HN user has stopped submitting/commenting doesn't mean they quit HN. Lurking is fun.

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

#120

Post by chalcolithic »

klyrs wrote: post #43
dang wrote: post #23

Getting it wrong for 12 years now: The Value of Downvoting, Or, How Hacker News Gets It Wrong (2009) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25633668 - Jan 2021 (1 comment) 10 Years In, Was He Right? “Value of Downvoting; How HN Gets It Wrong” - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23409231 - June 2020 (1 comment) The Value of Downvoting, or, How Hacker News Gets It Wrong (2009) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=…

The value of downvoting, or how Stackexchange gets it wrong about HN's voting system. It's hilarious that they start with some misconceptions about downvoting, notice that they're wrong, and forge boldly ahead without updating their understanding. If my hottest takes are any indication, the reputation floor -4 for a comment, not zero as they suggest. I haven't noticed a ceiling on upvotes. Upvotes help stories rise t…

I always assumed SE got voting right because why else are they the top dog? I never felt any need for them to exist because programming forums (or usenet groups earlier) exised since forever and once Google give us usable search(sorry, Altavista) I could find an answer for basically any question.
Post reply on HN