4 ms·

They more likely didn't read past the first sentence. I suspect a very thin skin. Seriously though, I don't know what makes this forum tick. Someone's gotta ex

They more likely didn't read past the first sentence. I suspect a very thin skin. Seriously though, I don't know what makes this forum tick. Someone's gotta explain what is socially acceptable around here. I know we're not supposed to complain about votes here, but I genuinely don't understand what happened. (Or rather, what is happening, the votes seem to flow up and down for no discernible reason.)

pvg 8y ago
Whining about downvotes and then trying to goad other users is bad and you shouldn't do it.
- loup-vaillant 8y ago
  Perhaps, but it looked like it worked. Somehow. For now. At the time I write this, the comment you are replying to is still positive (edit: oops, no longer), while it clearly breaks the stated rules of this forum (sated both officially and by you just now). And I'm pretty sure that if I didn't do it, my "who cares" comment above would have been further downvoted. I observed this several times on several forums, sometimes votes have a momentum, and breaking the rules like I did can sometimes stop that momentum. (This works the other way too: popular comments often stop having further upvotes after the first reply that disagrees.) Incidentally, I really think a good proportion of downvoters hit the button before reaching the end of the comment. Not because they're personally offended, but because their troll filter judge quickly, from the very first words (thinking back with a cooler head, I can't blame them). Starting a comment by something that looks offensive if taken out of context is a pretty sure way to get it downvoted to oblivion. Still, the threshold looks pretty damn low.
  - pvg 8y ago
    Perhaps, but it looked like it worked. That's not the reason you shouldn't whine about downvotes or goad other users. Not a 'perhaps' thing.
    - loup-vaillant 8y ago
      I wouldn't know about any absolute rule. Including "thou shalt not eat babies", if the circumstances are extreme enough. I understand why complaining about downvotes is looked down upon (off topic, distracting, feed the troll…), but there are cases where those are both unexpected and unwarranted. I mean, I originally replied to a comment that didn't add to the discussion with a comment that did. What was I supposed to do with it? What am I supposed to learn from it? Not even you provided any meaningful feedback.
      - pvg 8y ago
        What am I supposed to learn from it? That not everything is about you is a decent start.
        dang 8y ago
        Please don't get personally nasty.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
      - dang 8y ago
        My guess is that it got downvoted because it started on a snarky footing ("Seriously, who cares"), and then made a nitpicky point that isn't very interesting, and moreover is at odds with how mathematics actually works. (If it were right, we'd name theorems after the first person to correct the last error, but we don't.) So, kind of a shallow dismissal, which is the sort of thing we hope people won't post here. I realize you didn't mean it that way. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html p.s. Could you please not take HN threads into off-topic meta-hell in the future? There's a reason the site guidelines ask people not to do that.
        loup-vaillant 8y ago
        Honestly, the snarky comment was because I was exasperated by gizmo686's nitpick. He made a point that isn't very interesting, and moreover didn't contradict what I said, though it was phrased in a way that looked like it did. I hate that kind of manipulation, and it got to me. > and moreover is at odds with how mathematics actually works Ah now there's something interesting. How exactly was it at odds with maths? I never said anything about how a theorem was true, or provable. Just proven. If you could tell me how that was at odds with how maths works, I'd most probably learn something.

pvg 8y ago

Whining about downvotes and then trying to goad other users is bad and you shouldn't do it.

loup-vaillant 8y ago
Perhaps, but it looked like it worked. Somehow. For now. At the time I write this, the comment you are replying to is still positive (edit: oops, no longer), while it clearly breaks the stated rules of this forum (sated both officially and by you just now). And I'm pretty sure that if I didn't do it, my "who cares" comment above would have been further downvoted. I observed this several times on several forums, sometimes votes have a momentum, and breaking the rules like I did can sometimes stop that momentum. (This works the other way too: popular comments often stop having further upvotes after the first reply that disagrees.) Incidentally, I really think a good proportion of downvoters hit the button before reaching the end of the comment. Not because they're personally offended, but because their troll filter judge quickly, from the very first words (thinking back with a cooler head, I can't blame them). Starting a comment by something that looks offensive if taken out of context is a pretty sure way to get it downvoted to oblivion. Still, the threshold looks pretty damn low.
- pvg 8y ago
  Perhaps, but it looked like it worked. That's not the reason you shouldn't whine about downvotes or goad other users. Not a 'perhaps' thing.
  - loup-vaillant 8y ago
    I wouldn't know about any absolute rule. Including "thou shalt not eat babies", if the circumstances are extreme enough. I understand why complaining about downvotes is looked down upon (off topic, distracting, feed the troll…), but there are cases where those are both unexpected and unwarranted. I mean, I originally replied to a comment that didn't add to the discussion with a comment that did. What was I supposed to do with it? What am I supposed to learn from it? Not even you provided any meaningful feedback.
    - pvg 8y ago
      What am I supposed to learn from it? That not everything is about you is a decent start.
      - dang 8y ago
        Please don't get personally nasty.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - dang 8y ago
      My guess is that it got downvoted because it started on a snarky footing ("Seriously, who cares"), and then made a nitpicky point that isn't very interesting, and moreover is at odds with how mathematics actually works. (If it were right, we'd name theorems after the first person to correct the last error, but we don't.) So, kind of a shallow dismissal, which is the sort of thing we hope people won't post here. I realize you didn't mean it that way. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html p.s. Could you please not take HN threads into off-topic meta-hell in the future? There's a reason the site guidelines ask people not to do that.
      - loup-vaillant 8y ago
        Honestly, the snarky comment was because I was exasperated by gizmo686's nitpick. He made a point that isn't very interesting, and moreover didn't contradict what I said, though it was phrased in a way that looked like it did. I hate that kind of manipulation, and it got to me. > and moreover is at odds with how mathematics actually works Ah now there's something interesting. How exactly was it at odds with maths? I never said anything about how a theorem was true, or provable. Just proven. If you could tell me how that was at odds with how maths works, I'd most probably learn something.