3 ms·

Totally meta and OT but at the moment almost half the comments of this page are greyed out. It shows how lively the debate is (or maybe it'll settle one way or

Totally meta and OT but at the moment almost half the comments of this page are greyed out. It shows how lively the debate is (or maybe it'll settle one way or another, idk).

lainga 6y ago
I think the opposite is true. A lot of people expressing disagreement by trying to hide things they disagree with instead of rebutting them. I think the down arrow should be reserved for cases where you think they break "The Rules" (not the site rules, but your own judgment of good taste). But then again, maybe I am too lax in my judgment.
- pessimizer 6y ago
  Often when one disagrees with positions one also thinks they're lazy and a waste of time to discuss. If somebody in the thread "X is a problem" posts "Why don't we just do Y?" but when you google "X" every article starts with "We can't just do Y, because...," just downvote. This doesn't mean that doing "Y" isn't the answer, it means that if you're going to bring "Y" up, bring up all of the best arguments against "Y" that you already know first. Otherwise, you're just throwing out a low-effort troll tempting some good neighbor to spend a half-hour crafting an elaborate response for you; one ultimately unnecessary for anyone who has interest enough in the subject to google "X" and read the first hit. Your particular comment has probably been posted thousands of times, but HN isn't organized in a way that makes them easy to find.
calcifer 6y ago
> half the comments of this page are greyed out Deservedly so. Most (if not all) of those comments are ad hominems and doesn't address the proposed system in the article at all. In fact, there is no evidence those commentors have even read the article. One of them actually complains about how photogenic he is!
- mmm_grayons 6y ago
  Not really. Up until this morning, my comment had a positive number of votes; it is now very gray. It was not an ad hominem attack. It was a critique of the author's value more than his proposed policies, but I certainly read the article.
  - calcifer 6y ago
    I wasn't really talking about your comment, which is probably the only non-ad hominem gray comment so far. As for why you might be getting downvotes, I'd guess that "any system that limits how rich I can be is bad" is very disagreeable for most people and the voting reflects that.
    - mmm_grayons 6y ago
      Well, I didn't say that explicitly, but I'd definitely agree with that. I'm definitely okay if removing corruption inherently limits the amount of wealth one can acquire, but a system that explicitly does that is antithetical to the value of non-aggression and is a tremendous violation of property rights. Nevertheless, my objection was to the use of "voting as disagreement". That's what comments are for.
      - calcifer 6y ago
        > Nevertheless, my objection was to the use of "voting as disagreement". Oh, well that's a long lost fight. No matter how platform holders define a downvote, it has always meant I don't like this and there is too much inertia to change it.

Totally meta and OT but at the moment almost half the comments of this page are greyed out. It shows how lively the debate is (or maybe it'll settle one way or another, idk).

lainga 6y ago

I think the opposite is true. A lot of people expressing disagreement by trying to hide things they disagree with instead of rebutting them. I think the down arrow should be reserved for cases where you think they break "The Rules" (not the site rules, but your own judgment of good taste). But then again, maybe I am too lax in my judgment.

pessimizer 6y ago
Often when one disagrees with positions one also thinks they're lazy and a waste of time to discuss. If somebody in the thread "X is a problem" posts "Why don't we just do Y?" but when you google "X" every article starts with "We can't just do Y, because...," just downvote. This doesn't mean that doing "Y" isn't the answer, it means that if you're going to bring "Y" up, bring up all of the best arguments against "Y" that you already know first. Otherwise, you're just throwing out a low-effort troll tempting some good neighbor to spend a half-hour crafting an elaborate response for you; one ultimately unnecessary for anyone who has interest enough in the subject to google "X" and read the first hit. Your particular comment has probably been posted thousands of times, but HN isn't organized in a way that makes them easy to find.

calcifer 6y ago

> half the comments of this page are greyed out Deservedly so. Most (if not all) of those comments are ad hominems and doesn't address the proposed system in the article at all. In fact, there is no evidence those commentors have even read the article. One of them actually complains about how photogenic he is!

mmm_grayons 6y ago
Not really. Up until this morning, my comment had a positive number of votes; it is now very gray. It was not an ad hominem attack. It was a critique of the author's value more than his proposed policies, but I certainly read the article.
- calcifer 6y ago
  I wasn't really talking about your comment, which is probably the only non-ad hominem gray comment so far. As for why you might be getting downvotes, I'd guess that "any system that limits how rich I can be is bad" is very disagreeable for most people and the voting reflects that.
  - mmm_grayons 6y ago
    Well, I didn't say that explicitly, but I'd definitely agree with that. I'm definitely okay if removing corruption inherently limits the amount of wealth one can acquire, but a system that explicitly does that is antithetical to the value of non-aggression and is a tremendous violation of property rights. Nevertheless, my objection was to the use of "voting as disagreement". That's what comments are for.
    - calcifer 6y ago
      > Nevertheless, my objection was to the use of "voting as disagreement". Oh, well that's a long lost fight. No matter how platform holders define a downvote, it has always meant I don't like this and there is too much inertia to change it.