4 ms·

I'm starting to think hacker news needs a temporary ban on these capital riot articles. They do nothing but devolve into flame wars filled with emotional respon

by tayo42 6y ago

I'm starting to think hacker news needs a temporary ban on these capital riot articles. They do nothing but devolve into flame wars filled with emotional responses. They seem to attract the most hostile commenters

hn2017 6y ago
Exactly. People brigade from elsewhere too.
bargl 6y ago
I come to HN for fairly civil conversation on difficult topics. If we can't do it here, I honestly don't know where else I can do that. I agree that it's become a flame war, and IMO part of the issue is that at times people promote (up/down) vote based on agreement, and at other times people vote based on promoting a good conversation. I really want to see two voting mechanisms, an I agree woot, and another button that indicates is a well constructed argument that I think deserves conversation and views because it will promote healthy conversation. I'm not convinced people would use these appropriately, maybe they sit behind a "vote" count or you only get 5 votes a day or something, IDK. We've gamified agreement on these platforms, and I see things swing based on who shows up. I've seen my votes swing wildly based on what I'm interpreting as someone of a particular ideology come through. Either way we need to gamify conversation and not agreement, I don't know how to do that, but I think HN would be a great place to experiment with that idea.
- tayo42 6y ago
  Yeah that might contribute (idk if it's the only thing contributing to the way these discussions go) , an idea I had was that you can downvote by spending your upvote generated points.
  - bargl 6y ago
    I agree it's not the only thing contributing, but this would be a great place to experiment with those kinds of changes.
  - thu2111 6y ago
    Note that this is just one of the ideas implemented in Slashcode, which for all its faults was and still is probably the most sophisticated discussion forum software on the internet.

by tayo42 6y ago

hn2017 6y ago

Exactly. People brigade from elsewhere too.

bargl 6y ago

I come to HN for fairly civil conversation on difficult topics. If we can't do it here, I honestly don't know where else I can do that. I agree that it's become a flame war, and IMO part of the issue is that at times people promote (up/down) vote based on agreement, and at other times people vote based on promoting a good conversation. I really want to see two voting mechanisms, an I agree woot, and another button that indicates is a well constructed argument that I think deserves conversation and views because it will promote healthy conversation. I'm not convinced people would use these appropriately, maybe they sit behind a "vote" count or you only get 5 votes a day or something, IDK. We've gamified agreement on these platforms, and I see things swing based on who shows up. I've seen my votes swing wildly based on what I'm interpreting as someone of a particular ideology come through. Either way we need to gamify conversation and not agreement, I don't know how to do that, but I think HN would be a great place to experiment with that idea.

tayo42 6y ago
Yeah that might contribute (idk if it's the only thing contributing to the way these discussions go) , an idea I had was that you can downvote by spending your upvote generated points.
- bargl 6y ago
  I agree it's not the only thing contributing, but this would be a great place to experiment with those kinds of changes.
- thu2111 6y ago
  Note that this is just one of the ideas implemented in Slashcode, which for all its faults was and still is probably the most sophisticated discussion forum software on the internet.