2 ms·
Strictly speaking a vote does affect someone's karma. But it doesn't cause their karma to be net decreased as a result of posting a comment unless you downvote
by pg 17y ago
Strictly speaking a vote does affect someone's karma. But it doesn't cause their karma to be net decreased as a result of posting a comment unless you downvote the comment below 1, which most people don't do lightly. I think of the up and downvoting as a collaboration to determine how much additional karma someone should get for posting a new comment.
- jmonegro 17y agoSo the original purpose of binding comment scores to karma was to _supplement_ the overall karma of a user? Not to be confounded as one of the core ideas behind the whole system? Regardless of the original purpose, I think that fomenting conversation should be one of the most prominent ideas behind the whole karma deal. The comments and the conversations are what make HN different (and, of course, demographics, which consequently means that the comments of this given demographic, self-targeted, is what makes HN great), and I know many concur with that statement.
- mmt 17y agowhich most people don't do lightly Perhaps this is no longer true? Regardless, the fact the downvoting is just as easy as upvoting (and has no undo) strikes me as odd. I suggest downvoting cost the voter something, not just the votee. 1:1 seems simple enough. It would also give greater pause to newer users than veterans. However, an undo (perhaps timed like comment editing) would be more desirable in this case.
- brlewis 17y agoI agree, it should cost the voter 1:1 to downvote a comment, but only one that's already below 0.