5 ms·

I'm a huge fan of no downvote button, so much so in fact that I don't think users of any karma level should be able to do it. Why concentrate this power into t

I'm a huge fan of no downvote button, so much so in fact that I don't think users of any karma level should be able to do it. Why concentrate this power into the hands of a privileged few? It's a representative system where we vote certain users into high karma, but they needn't return any favors and can subsequently downvote things that are otherwise suitable for the platform. Privilege can, and will, be abused in full.

josephg 6y ago
I feel like downvoting on HN is a way of saying “No. We don’t behave like that here”. It’s one of our community’s tools for preserving, teaching and enforcing our values with newcomers. Yes, it’s open to abuse. But it fills an important social function. And from that perspective, of course it’s limited to people who’ve been involved in the community awhile.
- hanniabu 6y ago
  Personally I also use it for comments that are so absurd that they don't warrant a comment.
- jonnycomputer 6y ago
  Most people just use it to signal disagreement. I just did so now.
  - josephg 6y ago
    Don’t use downvotes to signal disagreement. It goes against the implicit and explicit guidelines of HN. And it drags HN closer to reddit. Even if you see other people using downvotes for disagreement, that doesn’t make it ok for you to do the same. Downvotes are for when people violate the norms and values of our community without thoughtfulness or self awareness. The difference is subtle sometimes, but your comment is exactly the kind of thing I downvote. Low effort, dismissal / rejection of the community’s norms without nuance or justification beyond “well other people do it too so that makes it ok”.
    - jonnycomputer 6y ago
      Actually, I think you completely misunderstood. I agree with you 110 percent that downvotes shouldn't be used to signal disagreement; I disagreed with you because that is, in fact, exactly how it is used most of the time. My downvote of you was ironic, illustrative of just how stupid down votes are. I was making a point. I think HN should remove down votes entirely, or make them costly, or required a tagged explanation.
    - BrandonM 6y ago
      I use downvotes to signal disagreement when, from my perspective, someone is giving bad advice, not accurately representing the truth, speculating in an unproductive way, distracting from the discussion with completely unfounded claims, etc. I personally think of "disagreement" as a continuum, where one end is pretty close to my own view, and the other is absolutely abhorrent or incoherent. Certainly part of that continuum warrants downvotes. "Don't use downvotes to signal disagreement," is meaningless in that context. More concretely, the HN guidelines say nothing about why to downvote. They only say, "Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading."
      - tediousdemise 6y ago
        > I use downvotes to signal disagreement when, from my perspective, someone is giving bad advice, not accurately representing the truth, speculating in an unproductive way, distracting from the discussion with completely unfounded claims, etc. This seems to be a really wide net for downvotes, and almost certainly won't match other people's use cases for downvoting. I don't think downvoting should be open to interpretation like this, hence why I think it should be removed. The alternative? Just don't upvote, or flag if something is truly inappropriate.
      - josephg 6y ago
        > I personally think of "disagreement" as a continuum, where one end is pretty close to my own view, and the other is absolutely abhorrent or incoherent. Yeah, I like this perspective but I think there's two axes we can separate a little. One axis is disagreement. (I agree with you <-> I disagree with you). the other axis is effort / coherence. (I'm going to invest significant effort to clearly articulate my point of view <-> I'm going to make a flippant off-handed comment). Disagreement alone isn't the problem - I've had some lovely conversations on HN with people I disagree with. Eg, a couple weeks ago I had this interesting exchange[1] talking about RMS on the FSF board. But the conversation worked because everyone was careful and articulate. When someone says something I disagree with, but they say it in a thoughtful, well articulated way, I learn something new. There's probably more factors at play, but as a rule of thumb I suppose downvotes are in the low effort + strong disagree quadrant. In that zone I feel like there's no implied intent to even talk it through. And absent conversation, why are we even here? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26611767 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26611767
- bhupy 6y ago
  Isn’t that what flagging is for?
  - tremon 6y ago
    Flagging is for spam, at least that what I use it for. I reserve my downvotes for conversational indecency: bad faith arguments, personal attacks, not acknowledging/engaging the parent post's points.
    - bhupy 6y ago
      I'm not sure why spam should be treated any differently than conversational indecency (personal attacks, bad faith arguing); in theory it could all fall under the bucket of "this doesn't belong here", right?
      - tremon 6y ago
        To me the difference is "this user doesn't belong here, go away" versus "this post doesn't belong here, try harder".
      - Sohcahtoa82 6y ago
        Personally, I flag for blatant rule violations such as comments that are filled with personal attacks or spam. I will downvote comments that are simply low quality, like comments that merely say "^ This!". I don't usually downvote bad faith arguing because it's hard to prove when someone is arguing in bad faith versus just simply having bad arguments.
        type0 6y ago
        > when someone is arguing in bad faith versus just simply having bad arguments. Sometimes the person just misinterprets the conversation, especially if not being a native english speaker, but the responses could get overly harsh and that's a pity because I'd like to see more international discussions here.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

josephg 6y ago

I feel like downvoting on HN is a way of saying “No. We don’t behave like that here”. It’s one of our community’s tools for preserving, teaching and enforcing our values with newcomers. Yes, it’s open to abuse. But it fills an important social function. And from that perspective, of course it’s limited to people who’ve been involved in the community awhile.

hanniabu 6y ago
Personally I also use it for comments that are so absurd that they don't warrant a comment.
jonnycomputer 6y ago
Most people just use it to signal disagreement. I just did so now.
- josephg 6y ago
  Don’t use downvotes to signal disagreement. It goes against the implicit and explicit guidelines of HN. And it drags HN closer to reddit. Even if you see other people using downvotes for disagreement, that doesn’t make it ok for you to do the same. Downvotes are for when people violate the norms and values of our community without thoughtfulness or self awareness. The difference is subtle sometimes, but your comment is exactly the kind of thing I downvote. Low effort, dismissal / rejection of the community’s norms without nuance or justification beyond “well other people do it too so that makes it ok”.
  - jonnycomputer 6y ago
    Actually, I think you completely misunderstood. I agree with you 110 percent that downvotes shouldn't be used to signal disagreement; I disagreed with you because that is, in fact, exactly how it is used most of the time. My downvote of you was ironic, illustrative of just how stupid down votes are. I was making a point. I think HN should remove down votes entirely, or make them costly, or required a tagged explanation.
  - BrandonM 6y ago
    I use downvotes to signal disagreement when, from my perspective, someone is giving bad advice, not accurately representing the truth, speculating in an unproductive way, distracting from the discussion with completely unfounded claims, etc. I personally think of "disagreement" as a continuum, where one end is pretty close to my own view, and the other is absolutely abhorrent or incoherent. Certainly part of that continuum warrants downvotes. "Don't use downvotes to signal disagreement," is meaningless in that context. More concretely, the HN guidelines say nothing about why to downvote. They only say, "Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading."
    - tediousdemise 6y ago
      > I use downvotes to signal disagreement when, from my perspective, someone is giving bad advice, not accurately representing the truth, speculating in an unproductive way, distracting from the discussion with completely unfounded claims, etc. This seems to be a really wide net for downvotes, and almost certainly won't match other people's use cases for downvoting. I don't think downvoting should be open to interpretation like this, hence why I think it should be removed. The alternative? Just don't upvote, or flag if something is truly inappropriate.
    - josephg 6y ago
      > I personally think of "disagreement" as a continuum, where one end is pretty close to my own view, and the other is absolutely abhorrent or incoherent. Yeah, I like this perspective but I think there's two axes we can separate a little. One axis is disagreement. (I agree with you <-> I disagree with you). the other axis is effort / coherence. (I'm going to invest significant effort to clearly articulate my point of view <-> I'm going to make a flippant off-handed comment). Disagreement alone isn't the problem - I've had some lovely conversations on HN with people I disagree with. Eg, a couple weeks ago I had this interesting exchange[1] talking about RMS on the FSF board. But the conversation worked because everyone was careful and articulate. When someone says something I disagree with, but they say it in a thoughtful, well articulated way, I learn something new. There's probably more factors at play, but as a rule of thumb I suppose downvotes are in the low effort + strong disagree quadrant. In that zone I feel like there's no implied intent to even talk it through. And absent conversation, why are we even here? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26611767 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26611767
bhupy 6y ago
Isn’t that what flagging is for?
- tremon 6y ago
  Flagging is for spam, at least that what I use it for. I reserve my downvotes for conversational indecency: bad faith arguments, personal attacks, not acknowledging/engaging the parent post's points.
  - bhupy 6y ago
    I'm not sure why spam should be treated any differently than conversational indecency (personal attacks, bad faith arguing); in theory it could all fall under the bucket of "this doesn't belong here", right?
    - tremon 6y ago
      To me the difference is "this user doesn't belong here, go away" versus "this post doesn't belong here, try harder".
    - Sohcahtoa82 6y ago
      Personally, I flag for blatant rule violations such as comments that are filled with personal attacks or spam. I will downvote comments that are simply low quality, like comments that merely say "^ This!". I don't usually downvote bad faith arguing because it's hard to prove when someone is arguing in bad faith versus just simply having bad arguments.
      - type0 6y ago
        > when someone is arguing in bad faith versus just simply having bad arguments. Sometimes the person just misinterprets the conversation, especially if not being a native english speaker, but the responses could get overly harsh and that's a pity because I'd like to see more international discussions here.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]