4 ms·
You shouldn't downvote people for asking questions, but asking a question and supporting it with a link that tells you the answer is fair game, especially when
by pdpi 6y ago
You shouldn't downvote people for asking questions, but asking a question and supporting it with a link that tells you the answer is fair game, especially when your "question" is an argument hidden behind a question mark, and the link disproves that argument.
There is, of course, the possibility that wincy's comment was meant to be tongue-in-cheek, though. I personally can't quite tell which way it was meant.
- gmfawcett 6y agoI guess I was being charitable, and imagining that the poster might be a Korean of a certain age where this myth held weight. The article suggests that young Koreans have changed attitudes, but that doesn't mean that everyone has. I think the comment replies to his question did a fine job challenging the myth. Obviously it's just my opinion, but I'd rather save downvotes for people who were clearly trolling or maliciously off-topic (and I don't see that here).
- pdpi 6y agoTo be clear, I didn't downvote their comment — I don't think it warranted it — I'm just saying I can sympathise with the argument that a comment that doesn't add anything useful to the discussion is a fair target for a downvote. Saying "But what about x?" when you yourself provide a link that says that X is a non-issue doesn't make for an engaging discussion. "But what about x? This link suggests it's not a problem but I think it is because of y" does make for an engaging discussion, even if y is seemingly nonsense.
- gmfawcett 6y agoThat's a fair point. Thanks for the respectful conversation about this. :)
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- slingnow 6y agoEven if the person turns out to be exactly as you've described, I think that they will have the resilience to overcome these devastating downvotes. Maybe this person could even use the downvotes as a signal that there is something seriously wrong with their belief and learn something new.
- mindcrime 6y agoFrom the HN guidelines: Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
- Dylan16807 6y agoI'm not sure what you're implying, because both interpretations are valid to downvote.
- mindcrime 6y agoI'm saying that this statement especially when your "question" is an argument hidden behind a question mark, is not consistent with the suggestion to "assume good faith" espoused in the guidelines.
- Dylan16807 6y agoAh, I see. I will note that people make arguments via questions pretty often in normal conversation, so that's not necessarily an accusation of significant bad faith. It could be more of a complaint about rhetorical technique. But let's treat it as an accusation of bad faith. In that case, we have a deeper issue. Assuming that it's a real question asked in good faith is actually the weakest plausible interpretation, because the link makes it a self-disproving theory. Honestly the tongue-in-cheek interpretation is probably the strongest one. There's no way to treat it as a strong argument and as a real question asked in good faith. Also it can be okay to downvote misinformation even when the commenter didn't do anything wrong.