4 ms·

> Always amazed at the sympathy people have for criminals who needlessly endangered dozens of lives. People who receive downvotes can sometimes believe that an

by grzm 9y ago

> Always amazed at the sympathy people have for criminals who needlessly endangered dozens of lives. People who receive downvotes can sometimes believe that anyone who is downvoting is doing so because they must support the opposite of what the poster believes. This, in my experience on HN, isn't necessarily (or even often) the case. Yes, there may be those who sympathize with Manning. However, there are plenty of other reasons one might find a comment worthy of a downvote: Is it substantive? Civil? Productive? Factually correct? On-topic? Charitable? Thoughtful? More likely to promote good, quality discussion rather than adversarial arguments? You may feel strongly about your position and feel that the subject of your comment is not worthy of charitable discourse (and it may very well not be), but the HN community is worthy of charitable discourse, or at least that's goal. Please help make it so, which includes following the guidelines.

zoeysaurusrex 9y ago
>People who receive downvotes can sometimes believe that anyone who is downvoting is doing so because they must support the opposite of what the poster believes. This, in my experience on HN, isn't necessarily (or even often) the case. Bingo. The majority of the time when I downvote anyone, it's because they are trying to seem more intelligent by overusing linked academic articles or by overusing vocabulary that doesn't really fit. Anytime I see someone using something as an excuse to "talk" when they really have nothing to say, they get downvoted. Yes I realize that's subjective and not perhaps what the downvote is for, but that's also my choice. Contrarion types on the other hand (and I don't mean the intelligent rhetorical folks who provoke good discussion) get a downvote immediately. I have no time for anyone who wants to disagree just to disagree so that they can make themselves look more philosophical or "deep". I know this makes me an asshole, but at least I'm not treating the downvote as an "I disagree button"
Taniwha 9y ago
I downvoted this one because of his sour grapes around downvoting ... community moderation means that there are lots of reasons for up/down voting - when I get downvoted I simply accept it, even if I don't agree, it's something that raises the signal to noise around here which is a good thing
rodgerd 9y ago
Exactly. It's a personal attack that doesn't engage with the substance of the article, and the subsequent whining about downvotes makes it clear the comment is from someone who hates Manning irrespective of the topic at hand.

by grzm 9y ago

zoeysaurusrex 9y ago

>People who receive downvotes can sometimes believe that anyone who is downvoting is doing so because they must support the opposite of what the poster believes. This, in my experience on HN, isn't necessarily (or even often) the case. Bingo. The majority of the time when I downvote anyone, it's because they are trying to seem more intelligent by overusing linked academic articles or by overusing vocabulary that doesn't really fit. Anytime I see someone using something as an excuse to "talk" when they really have nothing to say, they get downvoted. Yes I realize that's subjective and not perhaps what the downvote is for, but that's also my choice. Contrarion types on the other hand (and I don't mean the intelligent rhetorical folks who provoke good discussion) get a downvote immediately. I have no time for anyone who wants to disagree just to disagree so that they can make themselves look more philosophical or "deep". I know this makes me an asshole, but at least I'm not treating the downvote as an "I disagree button"

Taniwha 9y ago

I downvoted this one because of his sour grapes around downvoting ... community moderation means that there are lots of reasons for up/down voting - when I get downvoted I simply accept it, even if I don't agree, it's something that raises the signal to noise around here which is a good thing

rodgerd 9y ago

Exactly. It's a personal attack that doesn't engage with the substance of the article, and the subsequent whining about downvotes makes it clear the comment is from someone who hates Manning irrespective of the topic at hand.