3 ms·

> Or because I'm right but present an unpopular opinion? Some opinions are neither right nor wrong, they are just point of views, and the unpopular ones tend t

by marklgr 11y ago

> Or because I'm right but present an unpopular opinion? Some opinions are neither right nor wrong, they are just point of views, and the unpopular ones tend to get downvoted--admittedly, to a lesser extent on HN than other communities, but still happens. This has the unfortunate effect that, as you point out, the downvoted author doesn't know if there was something wrong with the tone or content, or if it just happened that his/her views are unpopular. Maybe asking for a few words (presumably in a small, unintrusive ajax form, and not visible in the main thread) as reason for downvoting could be useful, and somewhat deter "not-my-opinion-at-all" downvotes.

pjc50 11y ago
Like the old slashdot "+1 interesting"? There are nonconfrontational ways of presenting views you know are going to encounter flak. One is to do so as a question.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  > There are nonconfrontational ways of presenting views you know are going to encounter flak. True, but... > One is to do so as a question. ...this can often come off as passive-aggressive when it is used to present a view; that's not really an improvement. If you are stating a view, just state it: to make it nonconfrontational, don't be condescending to people who disagree, don't predict that you will be downvoted into oblivion or otherwise persecuted for posting it, and generally extend the same charity to the community that you would like them to extend to your viewpoint.
  - cpncrunch 11y ago
    >...this can often come off as passive-aggressive when it is used to present a view; that's not really an improvement. If you are stating a view, just state it: to make it nonconfrontational, don't be condescending to people who disagree, don't predict that you will be downvoted into oblivion or otherwise persecuted for posting it, and generally extend the same charity to the community that you would like them to extend to your viewpoint. Unfortunately this doesn't work. You still tend to get downvoted into oblivion. The problem is that if you poke holes in a dubious argument, you'll get downvoted simply because people disagree with you. There is no real way around this, and I've mostly given up on commenting except when I know I won't be downvoted. I don't really give a shit about karma, it's more the idea of rudeness/negativity behind people downvoting things that they disagree with -- even if you post a logical, well thought-out argument -- that I have a problem with.
    - dragonwriter 11y ago
      > Unfortunately this doesn't work. You still tend to get downvoted into oblivion. No, it does work; if it didn't, I wouldn't have more than 20K Karma, often with highly upvoted posts disagreeing with posts that are also upvoted (or at least not downvoted), including from people who are higher on the leaderboard. The idea that you get downvoted to oblivion simply for disagreeing with the majority regardless of quality on HN (whether it comes from people who describe the majority as politically right-libertarian or leftist, or pro-FSF, or those who describe it as pro-Apple, pro-Microsoft, pro-Google, or anti- any of those things -- and I've seen it from every possible side of all of those, except I don't think I've seen anyone accuse HN of having an anti-HN downvote-to-oblivion majority) is simply wrong. Depending on basically random factors (who is reading when) posts on controversial topics that make substantial points well may occasionally get early downvotes for disagreement, but usually that gets overwhelmed, or at least neutralized, by positive votes very quickly.
      - cpncrunch 11y ago
        It's pretty consistent. See for example my recent comment on a Parkinson's treatment where I said "there's fuck all evidence that it works", mentioning the placebo effect and overhyped science, which has -2. Perhaps people are offended by the swear word (which I thought was appropriate in the circumstances)? Perhaps I need to write a whole spiel explaining the placebo effect so I don't get instantly downvoted (I don't really have the time for that)? This happens every time, and it's a little irritating. I had a quick look at your comments and didn't see any comments such as this. ("downvoted into oblivion" is perhaps an exaggeration. I'm talking about -2 or -3 votes for a comment).
        DanBC 11y ago
        Yes, those were unfair downvotes. I'm guessing the shortness of your comment and the negativity without sources made a difference? But that's just a guess.
        kazinator 11y ago
DrScump 11y ago
It goes well beyond "unpopular ones tend to get downvoted." There are people who, having posted something "controversial" only because it bucks a common fallacy or "political correctness", will enlist all of their social media candidates to downvote someone who dared disagree with them... even if only via pointing out factual fallacies with objective references. I took a 50-point hit once on one posting simply by posting objective references that challenged (actually, disproved) a political rant. Like any form of "social media", it's partially a popularity contest.
DrScump 11y ago
It goes well beyond "unpopular ones tend to get downvoted." There are people who, having posted something "controversial" only because it bucks a common fallacy or "political correctness", will enlist all of their social media candidates to downvote someone who dared disagree with them... even if only via pointing out factual fallacies with objective references. I took a 50-point hit once on one posting simply by posting objective references that challenged (actually, disproved) a political rant. Like any form of "social media", it's partially a popularity contest.

by marklgr 11y ago

pjc50 11y ago

Like the old slashdot "+1 interesting"? There are nonconfrontational ways of presenting views you know are going to encounter flak. One is to do so as a question.

dragonwriter 11y ago
> There are nonconfrontational ways of presenting views you know are going to encounter flak. True, but... > One is to do so as a question. ...this can often come off as passive-aggressive when it is used to present a view; that's not really an improvement. If you are stating a view, just state it: to make it nonconfrontational, don't be condescending to people who disagree, don't predict that you will be downvoted into oblivion or otherwise persecuted for posting it, and generally extend the same charity to the community that you would like them to extend to your viewpoint.
- cpncrunch 11y ago
  >...this can often come off as passive-aggressive when it is used to present a view; that's not really an improvement. If you are stating a view, just state it: to make it nonconfrontational, don't be condescending to people who disagree, don't predict that you will be downvoted into oblivion or otherwise persecuted for posting it, and generally extend the same charity to the community that you would like them to extend to your viewpoint. Unfortunately this doesn't work. You still tend to get downvoted into oblivion. The problem is that if you poke holes in a dubious argument, you'll get downvoted simply because people disagree with you. There is no real way around this, and I've mostly given up on commenting except when I know I won't be downvoted. I don't really give a shit about karma, it's more the idea of rudeness/negativity behind people downvoting things that they disagree with -- even if you post a logical, well thought-out argument -- that I have a problem with.
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    > Unfortunately this doesn't work. You still tend to get downvoted into oblivion. No, it does work; if it didn't, I wouldn't have more than 20K Karma, often with highly upvoted posts disagreeing with posts that are also upvoted (or at least not downvoted), including from people who are higher on the leaderboard. The idea that you get downvoted to oblivion simply for disagreeing with the majority regardless of quality on HN (whether it comes from people who describe the majority as politically right-libertarian or leftist, or pro-FSF, or those who describe it as pro-Apple, pro-Microsoft, pro-Google, or anti- any of those things -- and I've seen it from every possible side of all of those, except I don't think I've seen anyone accuse HN of having an anti-HN downvote-to-oblivion majority) is simply wrong. Depending on basically random factors (who is reading when) posts on controversial topics that make substantial points well may occasionally get early downvotes for disagreement, but usually that gets overwhelmed, or at least neutralized, by positive votes very quickly.
    - cpncrunch 11y ago
      It's pretty consistent. See for example my recent comment on a Parkinson's treatment where I said "there's fuck all evidence that it works", mentioning the placebo effect and overhyped science, which has -2. Perhaps people are offended by the swear word (which I thought was appropriate in the circumstances)? Perhaps I need to write a whole spiel explaining the placebo effect so I don't get instantly downvoted (I don't really have the time for that)? This happens every time, and it's a little irritating. I had a quick look at your comments and didn't see any comments such as this. ("downvoted into oblivion" is perhaps an exaggeration. I'm talking about -2 or -3 votes for a comment).
      - DanBC 11y ago
        Yes, those were unfair downvotes. I'm guessing the shortness of your comment and the negativity without sources made a difference? But that's just a guess.
        kazinator 11y ago

DrScump 11y ago

It goes well beyond "unpopular ones tend to get downvoted." There are people who, having posted something "controversial" only because it bucks a common fallacy or "political correctness", will enlist all of their social media candidates to downvote someone who dared disagree with them... even if only via pointing out factual fallacies with objective references. I took a 50-point hit once on one posting simply by posting objective references that challenged (actually, disproved) a political rant. Like any form of "social media", it's partially a popularity contest.

DrScump 11y ago