3 ms·

I'll give you one example. Recently, someone posted a link to the new update for Python 2.7.2. At the time, on the python website itself, it stated that this wa

I'll give you one example. Recently, someone posted a link to the new update for Python 2.7.2. At the time, on the python website itself, it stated that this was not a production release and specifically said something along the lines of upgrade at your own risk (I quoted it word for word from the site). I then made a personal statement saying "I guess I won't be upgrading". I felt that it may help those who didn't scan the page and may miss the quote. And the specific comment I made was one about me, that affects only me reflecting the statement I quoted off the python site. I started getting downvotes for no apparent reason (at least none that I could see reasonably). To avoid it, I just deleted the comment. If others felt like they didn't care, they were more than welcome to download 2.7.2. I never said anything about why people shouldn't have downloaded it. All I wrote was literally what I just said above. For the record, it now looks like the site has been updated to reflect that it is a full production release.

ColinWright 15y ago
Here's one way to think about it, based purely on what you've said. I didn't see your comment, so I don't know for sure: Did you say anything unobvious? You quoted from the site that they declared it not to be a production release, and you said "OK - not for me." (I paraphrase) We can easily deduce that, as it's not a production release, then not everyone will want it. Fine. What did your comment really add? It was a personal, conversational, largely content-free, throw-away observation. This isn't a criticism, I'm merely trying to present a way of thinking that makes it less unreasonable for people to have down-voted a comment. HN was always intended to be unlike other sites, strongly encouraging meaty content, strongly discouraging light and fluffy comments and submissions. It's been drifting away from that, so people are starting to feel that there's more space for conversational-like comments. There is something of a back-lash from some of the older hands who remember what it was like. Or what they think they remember it was like. More content, less conversation. Discussion, not throw-away remarks.
- steventruong 15y ago
  I can see what you mean and I do understand that vantage point of view. However, I think downvoting something just because it doesn't necessarily add obvious value (which is relative) to the conversation is a mistake. Maybe it's just me but I would think it would make people more hesitant to speak freely just because others may perceive no value from it and getting downvoted as a result. It's very different than downvoting something because it's wrong (like 2+2 is not 5) or because the behavior was unacceptable.
  - fossuser 15y ago
    It may be a fine line with some fringe comments being downvoted when perhaps they shouldn't be, but without this it spirals out of control pretty quickly and the entire site becomes useless. Look at the transition that happened to Digg and subsequently Reddit. These were sites that originally had thoughtful or interesting users that would often be more informative then the content link itself (it's currently like this on HN). It seems for a while the bad comments get downvoted and removed, but once enough of the community is diluted with a critical mass of 'useless' users, bad comments start being upvoted and the site eventually only consists of the same bad one line jokes, completely devoid of content. At this point most of the old users move somewhere else.
  - mentat 15y ago
    As the grandparent says, this is a purposeful decision in this community. There's a goal of encouraging useful conversation, not just conversation. I do a lot less posting than I might otherwise and I make sure my comments have content before posting them. This hesitation helps ensure that I'm providing value, not just rambling opinion. Having an online community built around presenting value really is a feature, not a bug.
AndrewDucker 15y ago
Your comment doesn't add anything to the conversation, you don't supply information on why you wouldn't be upgrading, or what the advantages/disadvantages are to you (or anyone else). You just added meaningless noise to the thread. I'd have downvoted it myself.
- steventruong 15y ago
  It does. As I've said previously, I quoted the line that states its not production release and upgrading is at users own risk. I would think its self explanatory as to why I wouldn't upgrade. As for why it matters... as I've said, some people don't bother to scan the page. They simply click download. It's nice to have a reference pointed out. Maybe it's just me but I don't see it as meaningless as others do. That said, see my other reply above. I think it's bad to discourage people from speaking freely just because its subjectively not adding value to the overall conversation. It's one thing to downvote something that is deserving of a downvote, its another to discourage people from stating their opinions.

ColinWright 15y ago

Here's one way to think about it, based purely on what you've said. I didn't see your comment, so I don't know for sure: Did you say anything unobvious? You quoted from the site that they declared it not to be a production release, and you said "OK - not for me." (I paraphrase) We can easily deduce that, as it's not a production release, then not everyone will want it. Fine. What did your comment really add? It was a personal, conversational, largely content-free, throw-away observation. This isn't a criticism, I'm merely trying to present a way of thinking that makes it less unreasonable for people to have down-voted a comment. HN was always intended to be unlike other sites, strongly encouraging meaty content, strongly discouraging light and fluffy comments and submissions. It's been drifting away from that, so people are starting to feel that there's more space for conversational-like comments. There is something of a back-lash from some of the older hands who remember what it was like. Or what they think they remember it was like. More content, less conversation. Discussion, not throw-away remarks.

steventruong 15y ago
I can see what you mean and I do understand that vantage point of view. However, I think downvoting something just because it doesn't necessarily add obvious value (which is relative) to the conversation is a mistake. Maybe it's just me but I would think it would make people more hesitant to speak freely just because others may perceive no value from it and getting downvoted as a result. It's very different than downvoting something because it's wrong (like 2+2 is not 5) or because the behavior was unacceptable.
- fossuser 15y ago
  It may be a fine line with some fringe comments being downvoted when perhaps they shouldn't be, but without this it spirals out of control pretty quickly and the entire site becomes useless. Look at the transition that happened to Digg and subsequently Reddit. These were sites that originally had thoughtful or interesting users that would often be more informative then the content link itself (it's currently like this on HN). It seems for a while the bad comments get downvoted and removed, but once enough of the community is diluted with a critical mass of 'useless' users, bad comments start being upvoted and the site eventually only consists of the same bad one line jokes, completely devoid of content. At this point most of the old users move somewhere else.
- mentat 15y ago
  As the grandparent says, this is a purposeful decision in this community. There's a goal of encouraging useful conversation, not just conversation. I do a lot less posting than I might otherwise and I make sure my comments have content before posting them. This hesitation helps ensure that I'm providing value, not just rambling opinion. Having an online community built around presenting value really is a feature, not a bug.

AndrewDucker 15y ago

Your comment doesn't add anything to the conversation, you don't supply information on why you wouldn't be upgrading, or what the advantages/disadvantages are to you (or anyone else). You just added meaningless noise to the thread. I'd have downvoted it myself.

steventruong 15y ago
It does. As I've said previously, I quoted the line that states its not production release and upgrading is at users own risk. I would think its self explanatory as to why I wouldn't upgrade. As for why it matters... as I've said, some people don't bother to scan the page. They simply click download. It's nice to have a reference pointed out. Maybe it's just me but I don't see it as meaningless as others do. That said, see my other reply above. I think it's bad to discourage people from speaking freely just because its subjectively not adding value to the overall conversation. It's one thing to downvote something that is deserving of a downvote, its another to discourage people from stating their opinions.