I just think people feel peer pressure to downvote when someone already has karma less than 1. Does anyone else think this is true?
Ask PG: Are people getting more liberal with their downvotes?
31–40 of 64 posts
Re: Ask PG: Are people getting more liberal with their downvotes?
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
As an example: There was a post about the birthday of the user edw159. Some people thought that the post wasn't hacker "newsworthy" and others thought it was ok. I commented "I think edw159 is one of the more active members and recognizing his birthday is ok" and I was downvoted pretty far. I think my comment was appropriate and it added meaningfully to the conversation, but a lot of people downvoted it to (I assume)…
Initially you may worry about karma (as I did too) but we have to realise it does not exist (and that it does not matter)! I now appreciate down votes and see it as a way for the community to 'teach me' (not in a negative way par se but as a guiding/helping hand) in the simplest way possible. :)
knew that (karma hit) would happen :)
Re: Ask PG: Are people getting more liberal with their downvotes?
#33"If I disagree with someone, I won't vote up. If I really disagree with someone, I'll post a rejoinder comment." I haven't been here very long but I've thought that expressing disagreement isn't the purpose of a downvote at all. Instead, it's meant to indicate that a post detracts from the discussion and probably shouldn't have been posted to begin with. Using downvotes to express disagreement would only result in di…
As an example: There was a post about the birthday of the user edw159. Some people thought that the post wasn't hacker "newsworthy" and others thought it was ok. I commented "I think edw159 is one of the more active members and recognizing his birthday is ok" and I was downvoted pretty far. I think my comment was appropriate and it added meaningfully to the conversation, but a lot of people downvoted it to (I assume)…
I quite often up vote a comment I wouldn't normally touch if it's negative karma seems unjustified.
Re: Ask PG: Are people getting more liberal with their downvotes?
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gun to head, yeah, I do care about karma. But I only care insofar as I respect the community who's voting. The problem is that the indiscriminate downvote homogenizes discussion. The consensus opinion rises to the top. This is good when the group is good; bad when the group degrades.
you should care about the reasons behind votes, not the votes themselves.
How are you supposed to know the reasons behind the votes? Often times something of mine will get downvoted, and I'd like to address it, but I have no sense of what the problem is. I have to actively keep myself from deleting things that have received a quick negative response sometimes.
I have an idea: limit the number of downvotes per user per day. If the want to downvote something else, something will have to fall off the stack. I think there's less of a danger if people only downvote what they disagree most with, as opposed to dismissal.
(ps: wow guys. real funny.)
Re: Ask PG: Are people getting more liberal with their downvotes?
#35"If I disagree with someone, I won't vote up. If I really disagree with someone, I'll post a rejoinder comment." I haven't been here very long but I've thought that expressing disagreement isn't the purpose of a downvote at all. Instead, it's meant to indicate that a post detracts from the discussion and probably shouldn't have been posted to begin with. Using downvotes to express disagreement would only result in di…
PG once before weighed in with "it's ok to use the up and down arrows to express agreement" [1]. But, the mixing of the "quality" axis with an "agree/disagree" axis risks coarsening discussion. A disagree-downvote is mildly censorious: it lowers a comment's placement and docks the commenter's karma. It stings. I don't want to downvote comments simply because I disagree, but if such comments are highly-placed because…
If someone says "People should downvote to express disagreement." and I disagree with them should I downvote them?
Re: Ask PG: Are people getting more liberal with their downvotes?
#36And I say does it really matter in the grand scheme of things? So you got downvoted in a virtual community...my gosh the mind reels.
Ironic downmods are my least favorite thing in the world. Let's downmod jamongkad just because he claims not to care about being downvoted! Is that funny to people, or something? I just don't get it.
Im a fan of the ironic downvote personally. Its hilarious if you have the right sense of humor. It makes me almost pee myself laughing.
I don't understand why we shouldn't be hacking the downvote system. This is supposed to be hacker news. Ironic downmods seem consistent with that thinking, as well as consistent with the tricksters hackers are supposed to be.
Re: Ask PG: Are people getting more liberal with their downvotes?
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
you should care about the reasons behind votes, not the votes themselves.
How are you supposed to know the reasons behind the votes? Often times something of mine will get downvoted, and I'd like to address it, but I have no sense of what the problem is. I have to actively keep myself from deleting things that have received a quick negative response sometimes. I have an idea: limit the number of downvotes per user per day. If the want to downvote something else, something will have to fall…
Wow. Dani's comment was good, and she got downvoted just for fun. Not good guys. Things like this turn a good and serious site into something like reddit or digg, where there are no more intelligent conversations.
I don't like when my posts are downvoted, so I refrain downvoting people too, unless it is necessary. If I don't agree, I'd rather just voice my opinion.
Re: Ask PG: Are people getting more liberal with their downvotes?
#38"If I disagree with someone, I won't vote up. If I really disagree with someone, I'll post a rejoinder comment." I haven't been here very long but I've thought that expressing disagreement isn't the purpose of a downvote at all. Instead, it's meant to indicate that a post detracts from the discussion and probably shouldn't have been posted to begin with. Using downvotes to express disagreement would only result in di…
PG once before weighed in with "it's ok to use the up and down arrows to express agreement" [1]. But, the mixing of the "quality" axis with an "agree/disagree" axis risks coarsening discussion. A disagree-downvote is mildly censorious: it lowers a comment's placement and docks the commenter's karma. It stings. I don't want to downvote comments simply because I disagree, but if such comments are highly-placed because…
I downvoted you because I can't stand it when people use footnote notation in a posting that is only 1/5 of a page long.
Re: Ask PG: Are people getting more liberal with their downvotes?
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
PG once before weighed in with "it's ok to use the up and down arrows to express agreement" [1]. But, the mixing of the "quality" axis with an "agree/disagree" axis risks coarsening discussion. A disagree-downvote is mildly censorious: it lowers a comment's placement and docks the commenter's karma. It stings. I don't want to downvote comments simply because I disagree, but if such comments are highly-placed because…
I downvoted you because I can't stand it when people use footnote notation in a posting that is only 1/5 of a page long.
It looks longer when you are in the tiny HN comment text box. I think he is excused.
Re: Ask PG: Are people getting more liberal with their downvotes?
#40"If I disagree with someone, I won't vote up. If I really disagree with someone, I'll post a rejoinder comment." I haven't been here very long but I've thought that expressing disagreement isn't the purpose of a downvote at all. Instead, it's meant to indicate that a post detracts from the discussion and probably shouldn't have been posted to begin with. Using downvotes to express disagreement would only result in di…
PG once before weighed in with "it's ok to use the up and down arrows to express agreement" [1]. But, the mixing of the "quality" axis with an "agree/disagree" axis risks coarsening discussion. A disagree-downvote is mildly censorious: it lowers a comment's placement and docks the commenter's karma. It stings. I don't want to downvote comments simply because I disagree, but if such comments are highly-placed because…
The mixing of the "quality" axis with an "agree/disagree" axis risks coarsening discussion.
I think in practice there are only three useful situations:
- you post a good comment, and I agree
- you post a good comment, but I disagree
- you post a bad comment
I think we all want a scheme where I can reward you in the first two situations and punish you in the last one. Unfortunately what we seem to be getting is one that encourages rewards in the first and punishment in the second and third.
Here are my suggestions:
For comments, an upvote or downvote without a followup comment should only add or remove some fraction of a point in order to diminish the effect of people who silently agree or disagree. If you really want your disagreement to count significantly you'll have to comment and also take the risk that people will downvote (or upvote) you.
For posts, remove the upvote arrow from the main list until after someone has clicked on the link. People should have to at least read the thing they are upvoting.
Finally, make it possible for me to change my mind within a short interval of upvoting or downvoting.