4 ms·

> They've been trying to manipulate HN with multiple accounts and voting rings—which hasn't worked There have certainly been signs of “voting rings” (or someth

> They've been trying to manipulate HN with multiple accounts and voting rings—which hasn't worked There have certainly been signs of “voting rings” (or something else that causes similar end results) for over a year now. It has long been obvious that downvoting gets abused, as mentioned in other comments here. Does HN ever mean to acknowledge and address that?

dang 6y ago
These are perennial issues. We've worked hard on anti-voting-ring measures. The voting rings in their case didn't work. Baity titles are a harder issue and require moderation. If you want more information about this, I'd need to see specific links. Most of the things people say about these matters aren't true; they're overgeneralizations at best, and often just imagination. As for downvoting, people have been saying all the same things for well over a decade. The discussion circulates endlessly. Does downvoting get abused? Sure, but evaluating the system by specific examples is like evaluating an immune system by looking at what a couple of white blood cells did. You don't reprogram your immune system based on that—especially because the examples that stand out are always the cases that the system didn't handle perfectly.
- Razengan 6y ago
  > You don't reprogram your immune system based on that Yet HN clearly did reprogram their system, by requiring a minimum karma before an account is able to use the downvote button, and not allowing users to downvote replies to their comments, instead of just working like Reddit. What was the reason for that? Someone seems to have recognized the downsides of allowing everyone to bury comments, and made an attempt to limit that. That limit is no longer effective, as often seen in the drive-by downvoting on divisive topics and the burial of facts if somebody doesn’t like them. As the total number of HN users increases it becomes easier for all accounts to reach that minimum karma, e.g. by posting funny comments (HN is not immune to memes) and riding on bandwagons.
  - dang 6y ago
    That karma limit has been in place for 10 years or more. As I said, this discussion circulates endlessly; if you use HN Search you will find that all of these concerns/complaints go back to the beginning of the site. People have passionate, conflicting views about how downvoting should work, and commonly feel like the site is deteriorating because it doesn't work the way they would design it.
    - Razengan 6y ago
      > * That karma limit has been in place for 10 years or more.* But what was the reason? What is it supposed to achieve or prevent? > As I said, this discussion circulates endlessly That sounds like a reason to address this, instead of ignoring it. “People keep talking about it so let’s leave it the way it is”?
      - DoreenMichele 6y ago
        Good moderation is inherently tolerant of some friction and seeming imperfections. Trying to craft some Perfect social climate leads to horrifyingly draconian and oppressive stuff. I'm here for the life-giving, messy breath of fresh air not found in most online spaces. The reality is that moderation is about helping people tolerate people unlike themselves and about buffering the worst communication gaffs. But beneath it all, sometimes people are just grumpy or mean and there is no fixing that. You can only mitigate the worst expressions of it, not stamp it out. Right now, there's a Pandemic on. The world generally is pretty cranky and wanting to insist on someone fixing Something so they can feel like their world isn't spinning out of control. Members successfully bullying mods into fiddling with voting rules in a short-sighted manner to get some momentary sense of control in life isn't going to fix the pandemic. It's just going to undermine long-standing best practices for a well-run forum.
      - dang 6y ago
        You're assuming that it's possible to satisfy everybody. It isn't. For one thing the different requests are contradictory amongst themselves. One must make design choices. I think HN's design choices in this area are good and I've not heard sufficiently good reasons to change them. Not everyone agrees, but everybody will never agree.

dang 6y ago

These are perennial issues. We've worked hard on anti-voting-ring measures. The voting rings in their case didn't work. Baity titles are a harder issue and require moderation. If you want more information about this, I'd need to see specific links. Most of the things people say about these matters aren't true; they're overgeneralizations at best, and often just imagination. As for downvoting, people have been saying all the same things for well over a decade. The discussion circulates endlessly. Does downvoting get abused? Sure, but evaluating the system by specific examples is like evaluating an immune system by looking at what a couple of white blood cells did. You don't reprogram your immune system based on that—especially because the examples that stand out are always the cases that the system didn't handle perfectly.

Razengan 6y ago
> You don't reprogram your immune system based on that Yet HN clearly did reprogram their system, by requiring a minimum karma before an account is able to use the downvote button, and not allowing users to downvote replies to their comments, instead of just working like Reddit. What was the reason for that? Someone seems to have recognized the downsides of allowing everyone to bury comments, and made an attempt to limit that. That limit is no longer effective, as often seen in the drive-by downvoting on divisive topics and the burial of facts if somebody doesn’t like them. As the total number of HN users increases it becomes easier for all accounts to reach that minimum karma, e.g. by posting funny comments (HN is not immune to memes) and riding on bandwagons.
- dang 6y ago
  That karma limit has been in place for 10 years or more. As I said, this discussion circulates endlessly; if you use HN Search you will find that all of these concerns/complaints go back to the beginning of the site. People have passionate, conflicting views about how downvoting should work, and commonly feel like the site is deteriorating because it doesn't work the way they would design it.
  - Razengan 6y ago
    > * That karma limit has been in place for 10 years or more.* But what was the reason? What is it supposed to achieve or prevent? > As I said, this discussion circulates endlessly That sounds like a reason to address this, instead of ignoring it. “People keep talking about it so let’s leave it the way it is”?
    - DoreenMichele 6y ago
      Good moderation is inherently tolerant of some friction and seeming imperfections. Trying to craft some Perfect social climate leads to horrifyingly draconian and oppressive stuff. I'm here for the life-giving, messy breath of fresh air not found in most online spaces. The reality is that moderation is about helping people tolerate people unlike themselves and about buffering the worst communication gaffs. But beneath it all, sometimes people are just grumpy or mean and there is no fixing that. You can only mitigate the worst expressions of it, not stamp it out. Right now, there's a Pandemic on. The world generally is pretty cranky and wanting to insist on someone fixing Something so they can feel like their world isn't spinning out of control. Members successfully bullying mods into fiddling with voting rules in a short-sighted manner to get some momentary sense of control in life isn't going to fix the pandemic. It's just going to undermine long-standing best practices for a well-run forum.
    - dang 6y ago
      You're assuming that it's possible to satisfy everybody. It isn't. For one thing the different requests are contradictory amongst themselves. One must make design choices. I think HN's design choices in this area are good and I've not heard sufficiently good reasons to change them. Not everyone agrees, but everybody will never agree.