3 ms·

> HN tends to downvote any political comments, especially comments that turn the discussion more political, even in a story that already tangentially touches on

> HN tends to downvote any political comments, especially comments that turn the discussion more political, even in a story that already tangentially touches on politics That's... really not true. Case-in-point: look at any frontpage post that talks about health insurance, wage floors, guaranteed minimum income, etc. There's a clearly dominant opinion, and left-leaning opinions tend to be the most frequently-posted (as well as the most frequently upvoted). This is ignoring tech-politics (ie, net neutrality, digital privacy). People do use the downvote as a signal of disagreement (which is a problem[0], because it just polarizes discussions even more by driving away constructive, dissenting opinions[1]). But the people who downvote any political sentiment don't outweigh the rest, as evidenced by the end results. [0] To pre-empt the perennial debate on whether downvoting purely for disagreement is bad, here are dang's thoughts on the matter: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7606517 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7606517 [1] There are topics on which I have a lot of domain knowledge relative to the typical HN commenter. I used to be more proactive with sharing this information in HN comments when relevant, but I only do this a small fraction of the time compared to a few years ago[2]. There's nothing more discouraging than writing a 500-word comment with multiple footnotes and external citations to primary sources and peer-reviewed articles, only to be downvoted for expressing a contrary opinion, or even simply a more nuanced version of the dominant one. [2] I won't say whether it's gotten better or worse, but I've certainly learned from those experiences over time, and from my observations, so have other users.

drzaiusapelord 10y ago
The fact that your excellent and sourced comment has been downvoted to the point of it being near invisible on my screen just further proves your point. >There are topics on which I have a lot of domain knowledge relative to the typical HN commenter. I also agree with this. I have domain knowledge in a couple odd places and the top voted comments on these domains on places like reddit or HN are embrassingly wrong. It used to be we'd get a random expert drop some serious knowledge but those people seem to be gone. If you're just a run of the mill Joe and finding your random musings racing to the top via upvotes, chances are you don't know what you're really talking about, but you know how to "work the room." Experts usually have better things to do and probably get easily discouraged by being downvoted and having to real with disingenuous or ignorant replies. Internet forums have a real problem with Dunning-Kruger suffering participants. Say, some geek does a little light reading and now thinks he's an expert on some topic. The guys upvoting him did the same light reading. So if you disagree with that Salon or Guardian or Huffpost narrative, then you're going to be downvoted because it goes against what the "local experts" think. The problem is that article, even if it isn't biased, certainly has not exhausted the problem domain or touched upon more advanced criticisms or alternative theories. How could it, in an article written for a general audience and often under 700 words? Its a bit like being in a small town. You don't criticize the local pastor or mayor, unless you want an earful on how "we all know better than you." This is also why certain types of people flee small towns. Its insular nature is same as on internet forums unfortunately. Being mindful of this seems to be the only sane path forward and having serious skepticism of popular internet narratives as well.

drzaiusapelord 10y ago

The fact that your excellent and sourced comment has been downvoted to the point of it being near invisible on my screen just further proves your point. >There are topics on which I have a lot of domain knowledge relative to the typical HN commenter. I also agree with this. I have domain knowledge in a couple odd places and the top voted comments on these domains on places like reddit or HN are embrassingly wrong. It used to be we'd get a random expert drop some serious knowledge but those people seem to be gone. If you're just a run of the mill Joe and finding your random musings racing to the top via upvotes, chances are you don't know what you're really talking about, but you know how to "work the room." Experts usually have better things to do and probably get easily discouraged by being downvoted and having to real with disingenuous or ignorant replies. Internet forums have a real problem with Dunning-Kruger suffering participants. Say, some geek does a little light reading and now thinks he's an expert on some topic. The guys upvoting him did the same light reading. So if you disagree with that Salon or Guardian or Huffpost narrative, then you're going to be downvoted because it goes against what the "local experts" think. The problem is that article, even if it isn't biased, certainly has not exhausted the problem domain or touched upon more advanced criticisms or alternative theories. How could it, in an article written for a general audience and often under 700 words? Its a bit like being in a small town. You don't criticize the local pastor or mayor, unless you want an earful on how "we all know better than you." This is also why certain types of people flee small towns. Its insular nature is same as on internet forums unfortunately. Being mindful of this seems to be the only sane path forward and having serious skepticism of popular internet narratives as well.