3 ms·

It should also be fucking obvious that downvotes are not being made for something as yet unknown that I do in the future and only in response to the downvoting

It should also be fucking obvious that downvotes are not being made for something as yet unknown that I do in the future and only in response to the downvoting (ie: criticising it as childish). And downvoting someone because they call specific downvoting childish? That seems like the epitome of childishness to me, and simply validates my point.

DanBC 10y ago
Your first post to this thread says: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11644954 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11644954 > Downvoting (ie, trying to bury or hide a post) because someone says sumfing u don't wike is pathetic and childish; if you disagree either argue against it or move on. The rest of your comments increase the attack. You are getting downvotes because your posts go on a meta tangent, and use insults. Stuff like this... > umfing u don't wike is pathetic and childish ... is obviously going to get downvoted.
- hartpuff 10y ago
  Where's my so-called "attack" or "insult" in this entirely reasonable post then (aside from the edit, which was obviously made after I was downvoted), with a lower score than the one you cited? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11645104 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11645104 Or this one (also with a lower score): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11645505 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11645505 > is obviously going to get downvoted. For the baby language, maybe, but downvoting something you don't personally like is pathetic and childish. That's not an "attack" or an "insult", it's a fact. And it's, if anything, even more pathetic and childish to petulantly downvote a poster (perhaps across different posts) because they point out that fact.
  - DanBC 10y ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11645104 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11645104 was downvoted for being an incoherent non-addition to the discussion. I've re-read it several times and I have no idea why you thought it was relevant or what point you were trying to make. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11645505 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11645505 > I honestly can't tell if this is meant to be serious or not. Comments like that will usually get you downvotes. > For the baby language, maybe, but downvoting something you don't personally like is pathetic and childish. "People will downvote for disagreement" is a long established convention on HN. You might disagree with (I do too), but pointing it out by calling people childish is going to get downvoted. Your choice is to keep complaining using the same language (but stop complaining about being downvoted if you do so), or to use different language to complain about downvoting. Here's PG suggesting that downvote to disagree is a problem https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1057347 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1057347 Here' PG suggesting that downvote to disagree isn't a problem: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=658683 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=658683 See also this thread where most people are talking about a misuse of upvoting (to upvote mean or dumb comments). https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2403696 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2403696 > And it's, if anything, even more pathetic and childish to petulantly downvote a poster (perhaps across different posts) because they point out that fact. It's also childish to keep whining^W complaining about downvotes using the same language that got you downvotes.
    - hartpuff 10y ago
      > I've re-read it several times and I have no idea why you thought it was relevant or what point you were trying to make. So people downvoted because you personally can't understand the following two laughably easy to understand sentences? Let's say someone here posts "fuck off" or "you're an idiot". Please explain how that can be interpreted as constructive to a discussion here. Made - completely relevantly - in response to someone claiming "non-constructive" is always subjective. > Comments like that will usually get you downvotes. Why? Her post made no sense to me. If I can't tell if someone is being serious how am I supposed to find out? If only I had 500+ karma, I guess I could have just mindlessly downvoted her instead, since according to you if someone can't understand a post, the poster should suffer for it. > You might disagree with (I do too), but pointing it out by calling people childish is going to get downvoted. > It's also childish to keep whining^W complaining about downvotes using the same language that got you downvotes. Yet somehow okay for you to use the same language?
      - dang 10y ago
        Please stop, all of you.
        DanBC 10y ago
        Sorry.
    - jsprogrammer 10y ago
      Thanks for those links. Just the other day dang and tptacek were (absurdly) claiming that karma has no value; yet, here was tptacek on the second comment in your (2403696) link: >Users should live or die by their votes on that comment. If you vote up the blub comment, you should personally get the downvotes for it too. Upvotes should expose you to the karmic downside of superficial comments.

DanBC 10y ago

Your first post to this thread says: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11644954 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11644954 > Downvoting (ie, trying to bury or hide a post) because someone says sumfing u don't wike is pathetic and childish; if you disagree either argue against it or move on. The rest of your comments increase the attack. You are getting downvotes because your posts go on a meta tangent, and use insults. Stuff like this... > umfing u don't wike is pathetic and childish ... is obviously going to get downvoted.

hartpuff 10y ago
Where's my so-called "attack" or "insult" in this entirely reasonable post then (aside from the edit, which was obviously made after I was downvoted), with a lower score than the one you cited? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11645104 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11645104 Or this one (also with a lower score): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11645505 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11645505 > is obviously going to get downvoted. For the baby language, maybe, but downvoting something you don't personally like is pathetic and childish. That's not an "attack" or an "insult", it's a fact. And it's, if anything, even more pathetic and childish to petulantly downvote a poster (perhaps across different posts) because they point out that fact.
- DanBC 10y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11645104 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11645104 was downvoted for being an incoherent non-addition to the discussion. I've re-read it several times and I have no idea why you thought it was relevant or what point you were trying to make. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11645505 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11645505 > I honestly can't tell if this is meant to be serious or not. Comments like that will usually get you downvotes. > For the baby language, maybe, but downvoting something you don't personally like is pathetic and childish. "People will downvote for disagreement" is a long established convention on HN. You might disagree with (I do too), but pointing it out by calling people childish is going to get downvoted. Your choice is to keep complaining using the same language (but stop complaining about being downvoted if you do so), or to use different language to complain about downvoting. Here's PG suggesting that downvote to disagree is a problem https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1057347 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1057347 Here' PG suggesting that downvote to disagree isn't a problem: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=658683 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=658683 See also this thread where most people are talking about a misuse of upvoting (to upvote mean or dumb comments). https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2403696 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2403696 > And it's, if anything, even more pathetic and childish to petulantly downvote a poster (perhaps across different posts) because they point out that fact. It's also childish to keep whining^W complaining about downvotes using the same language that got you downvotes.
  - hartpuff 10y ago
    > I've re-read it several times and I have no idea why you thought it was relevant or what point you were trying to make. So people downvoted because you personally can't understand the following two laughably easy to understand sentences? Let's say someone here posts "fuck off" or "you're an idiot". Please explain how that can be interpreted as constructive to a discussion here. Made - completely relevantly - in response to someone claiming "non-constructive" is always subjective. > Comments like that will usually get you downvotes. Why? Her post made no sense to me. If I can't tell if someone is being serious how am I supposed to find out? If only I had 500+ karma, I guess I could have just mindlessly downvoted her instead, since according to you if someone can't understand a post, the poster should suffer for it. > You might disagree with (I do too), but pointing it out by calling people childish is going to get downvoted. > It's also childish to keep whining^W complaining about downvotes using the same language that got you downvotes. Yet somehow okay for you to use the same language?
    - dang 10y ago
      Please stop, all of you.
      - DanBC 10y ago
        Sorry.
  - jsprogrammer 10y ago
    Thanks for those links. Just the other day dang and tptacek were (absurdly) claiming that karma has no value; yet, here was tptacek on the second comment in your (2403696) link: >Users should live or die by their votes on that comment. If you vote up the blub comment, you should personally get the downvotes for it too. Upvotes should expose you to the karmic downside of superficial comments.