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

221–230 of 475 posts

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

#221

Post by DoreenMichele »

minimaxir wrote: post #119
the_lonely_road wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Some people have simply changed their handle and that likely wouldn't be obvious from the public data set either.

My old handle has 25k. It has been inactive since I moved to this one.

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

#222

Post by striking »

ipband wrote: post #206
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.

It's not just downvoting that makes HN strong, it's IP banning. Right now I'm commenting via a new user I created via my work VPN, because nothing on my home network is allowed to create new users on HN now or effectively comment, since I always did so using temporary accounts. I'm getting so much more done, so- thanks, HN!

You can usually be un-IP-banned by going to a particular URL. It's usually not permanent.

As for the thing you were banned for, do you feel like HN owes you the ability to make an account per comment?

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

#223

Post by ascar »

ipband wrote: post #206
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.

It's not just downvoting that makes HN strong, it's IP banning. Right now I'm commenting via a new user I created via my work VPN, because nothing on my home network is allowed to create new users on HN now or effectively comment, since I always did so using temporary accounts. I'm getting so much more done, so- thanks, HN!

Are static ips a common thing in the US? Here in Germany getting a fresh ip is as easy as restarting the router unless you explicitly pay for a static ip.

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

#224

Post by klyrs »

chalcolithic wrote: post #120
klyrs wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> why else are they the top dog?

They've got really good SEO game, and answers to most of my newbie questions when I'm learning a new language. But I tried contributing to the site for a little while... nope, it's wickedly political for all the wrong reasons and I quit before long.

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

#225

Post by bhupy »

tremon wrote: post #207
bhupy wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t that what flagging is for?

Flagging is for spam, at least that what I use it for. I reserve my downvotes for conversational indecency: bad faith arguments, personal attacks, not acknowledging/engaging the parent post's points.

I'm not sure why spam should be treated any differently than conversational indecency (personal attacks, bad faith arguing); in theory it could all fall under the bucket of "this doesn't belong here", right?

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

#226

Post by jokab »

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…

Upvoted :)

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

#227

Post by DangitBobby »

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.

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.

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

#228

Post by rocqua »

TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #212
kodah wrote: post #187

I've been downvoted to [dead] before, though I've never gotten mad about it. One trend I have noticed is that on HN you won't necessarily be downvoted for your idea but you definitely will be downvoted for how you present it. If you come off as vitriolic or angry, you can expect a proportionate response. Frustration seems to be tolerated intermittently.

You can definitely be downvoted for ideas here. Comments that go significantly against the political norms of the site seem particularly prone to this.

Whilst that us true, I think many of these comments are combative, argumentative, or implying more than arguing.

I think a thoughtful and compassionate but unfavored argument here will not be downvoted to death.

That is a higher standard than what the accepted political stances face. But it feels better than what is achieved in any other place.

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

#229

Post by ascar »

TheManInThePub wrote: post #135
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…

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 seen intelligent and insightful HN posts down voted simply because they went against the status-quo

The best thing to do here is for the community to step in and actively up-vote unfairly downvoted comments.

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

#230

Post by type0 »

freedomben wrote: post #104
wvenable wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Flagging is necessary to keep the site on-topic in my opinion. People will happily upvote controversy that has little value or importance to this site.

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).

> if staying wonderful means we have to tolerate censorship,

The rules to stay on topic is not the same as censorship. Often I noticed people talk (write) past each other and get into misunderstandings; it happens to me I'll admit.

Post reply on HN