4 ms·

> Yes well, because you didn't have enough magical points. Other HN participants had more magical points and downvoted that comment to oblivion. This isn't a go

by untog 6y ago

> Yes well, because you didn't have enough magical points. Other HN participants had more magical points and downvoted that comment to oblivion. This isn't a good example to show how HN is sexist. It is. Or at least, it's an example of how karma point systems like those on HN and Reddit reward groupthink. If you say something the majority of people agree with they'll give you points, and then you can use those points to upvote other people with the same opinions. If enough people holding the power to give karma are sexist, they'll reward sexist behaviour, and the site will become sexist. In any case, this post has already been flagged so I guess the community won't be having that discussion, yet again. Until next time...

RHSeeger 6y ago
At it's base level, the groupthink thing is > If you tend to voice ideas that the majority of the group believes are not constructive, then you do not get to participate in deciding what comments are constructive to the group. That is not the same thing as the group being sexist/racist/any-other-ist. It can lead to the same outcome of the majority of the group thinks various-ist comments are constructive (or, more specifically, if the majority of the group is unwilling to flag various-ist comments as unconstructive). However, the underlying cause is not the same. It's the difference between a person being racist and a person not taking a stand to help prevent others from feeling the effects of racism.
RHSeeger 6y ago
While I don't strictly agree with what's being said here (I have another comment explaining why), the sentiment being express IS constructive. The point of downvoting on HN isn't to express "I don't agree with this", it's for "this is not constructive to the conversation". I do not believe it should be downvoted. That being said, discussing and/or complaining about another vote being downvoted is, I believe, also against the rules, so I'll take my punishment quietly.
- jolux 6y ago
  > The point of downvoting on HN isn't to express "I don't agree with this", it's for "this is not constructive to the conversation". I do not believe it should be downvoted. This is an ideal to be approached though, not one which is always reached. I can say with virtual certainty that there is overlap between opinions this group disagrees with and opinions it labels as not constructive to the conversation.
  - RHSeeger 6y ago
    Acknowledged. I wasn't saying "you were downvoted because...". Rather, I was saying "This person should not have been downvoted, because...". I agree that there's overlap, and I was pointing out that it was happening here and shouldn't.
- pmiller2 6y ago
  There is some ancient comment by pg that says something to the effect of "downvoting to express disagreement is fine," that people always bring out when this discussion happens. I think that should change. Downvoting simply because you disagree should not be the desired behavior, and flagging for disagreement especially shouldn't be desired. I can't say that I live up to that standard. But, I do vouch probably 10x more than I flag. Browsing with showdead on, I get to see an interesting view of HN, and there are some bits of gold in the sluice there.

by untog 6y ago

RHSeeger 6y ago

At it's base level, the groupthink thing is > If you tend to voice ideas that the majority of the group believes are not constructive, then you do not get to participate in deciding what comments are constructive to the group. That is not the same thing as the group being sexist/racist/any-other-ist. It can lead to the same outcome of the majority of the group thinks various-ist comments are constructive (or, more specifically, if the majority of the group is unwilling to flag various-ist comments as unconstructive). However, the underlying cause is not the same. It's the difference between a person being racist and a person not taking a stand to help prevent others from feeling the effects of racism.

RHSeeger 6y ago

While I don't strictly agree with what's being said here (I have another comment explaining why), the sentiment being express IS constructive. The point of downvoting on HN isn't to express "I don't agree with this", it's for "this is not constructive to the conversation". I do not believe it should be downvoted. That being said, discussing and/or complaining about another vote being downvoted is, I believe, also against the rules, so I'll take my punishment quietly.

jolux 6y ago
> The point of downvoting on HN isn't to express "I don't agree with this", it's for "this is not constructive to the conversation". I do not believe it should be downvoted. This is an ideal to be approached though, not one which is always reached. I can say with virtual certainty that there is overlap between opinions this group disagrees with and opinions it labels as not constructive to the conversation.
- RHSeeger 6y ago
  Acknowledged. I wasn't saying "you were downvoted because...". Rather, I was saying "This person should not have been downvoted, because...". I agree that there's overlap, and I was pointing out that it was happening here and shouldn't.
pmiller2 6y ago
There is some ancient comment by pg that says something to the effect of "downvoting to express disagreement is fine," that people always bring out when this discussion happens. I think that should change. Downvoting simply because you disagree should not be the desired behavior, and flagging for disagreement especially shouldn't be desired. I can't say that I live up to that standard. But, I do vouch probably 10x more than I flag. Browsing with showdead on, I get to see an interesting view of HN, and there are some bits of gold in the sluice there.