6 ms·

Can we as a HN community stop downvoting comments because we don't like the reality of what is happening? I know the reality of unavoidable climate catastrophe

Can we as a HN community stop downvoting comments because we don't like the reality of what is happening? I know the reality of unavoidable climate catastrophe is uncomfortable to talk about, but aggressive denial is really a problem in the HN community. I can completely understand people who haven't studied this topic in depth not being aware of how dire the situation is, so asking questions or debating is healthy and expected. Downvoting a comment consisting of a statement of fact combined with a logical hypothesis derived from that fact, backed up by 3 well known citations is not a healthy direction for this community to develop in. Denial is a part of dealing with this reality, but as a community we should work a bit harder to move towards better acceptance and understanding.

newaccount2021 4y ago
novaRom 4y ago
Proposal: make possible to vote up/down only if a new comment submitted.
- ianai 4y ago
  Or just have upvote and “disagree” buttons separately.
  - k0k0r0 4y ago
    This is such a great idea! Very often I disagree with some comment and nevertheless upvote, because that comment is really thoughtful and is an important contribution to the discussion with important subjects or perspectives that need to be considered.
  - k0k0r0 4y ago
    Edit: Sorry about that duplicate. I couldn't see my other comment and thought my phone has failed submitting. Yes, I totally agree. Often I upvote a comment I disagree with since it nevertheless is a thoughtful and important contribution to the discussion. I feel I learn most from people I disagree with.
- rwmj 4y ago
  Slashdot used to disallow voting if you also comment on the same article.
lexapro 4y ago
I didn't even downvote it, but saying "we are not doing nearly enough, therefore we are doomed" encourages some people to conclude "well, then we can pollute as much as we want, it doesn't matter anyway". Yes, we are on the wrong path, and it's becoming more unrealistic by the day, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't still strive towards 2 degrees.
- nosianu 4y ago
  > but saying "we are not doing nearly enough, therefore we are doomed OP did not write that at all! He only wrote a single sentence, why did you create new text to criticize and attribute it to OP? I myself keep pointing to the NOAAA page for the CO2 growth rate (https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/gr.html https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/gr.html) - which is positive and increasing. OP is correct and the parent is too. Even the growth rate still increases, it still keeps getting worse faster! It's unpopular on reddit's /r/de too to say that, with similar justification. As if lying and keeping truth away won't hurt much more because no, people are stupid but not completely. In addition here in Germany I got so watch from a front seat how the people in the country react when even just a single fossil fuel is cut - and only partially (even for Germany Russia only supplies a part of the gas, even if it's a substantial one). We actually needed to stop regardless of the Russian situation, for climate change alone. Which nobody ever even dares to mention, the public discussion and what politicians have to say is all about "crisis mode". I have not seen a single politician try to reframe it as "we need to do this anyway", it's either about supporting people financially to be able to afford more expensive gas, about who needs to save, or how and where to get other gas faster than 2024 (deal with Katar for LNG). The head of the state of Saxony warned of "deindustrialization". But we need to cut fossil fuel anyway! Worldwide! The current crisis should be a chance, but it is only seen, and only framed, as "crisis", to be remedied to get back to full gas storage and fully flowing supplies. The situation IS this dire! Try significantly reducing usage of fossil fuels in any country. You get riots. You can plant as many trees and ban plastic straws all you like, the only thing that would make a dent is a significant reduction in removing any more fossil fuels of any kind from below ground to feed it into the above ground carbon cycle. And it is truth that it looks really really bad. That would just limit the growth rate, it still would do nothing towards actually lowering atmospheric CO2.
JadoJodo 4y ago
This was my thought as well. There have been several comments in this thread (and others like it recently) where the content of the comment was: - A thoughtful, non-flippant response and sometimes included citations - In disagreement with the article/other comments - Downvoted almost instantly I personally enjoy reading many of this community's comments, thoughts, and ideas, especially when someone has taken the time to write out a thoughtful response, and even if I may not agree with the conclusion. I really hope others do, as well.
BurningFrog 4y ago
This post is about the imagined mindset of people who downvoted a post, that isn't even downvoted.

newaccount2021 4y ago

novaRom 4y ago

Proposal: make possible to vote up/down only if a new comment submitted.

ianai 4y ago
Or just have upvote and “disagree” buttons separately.
- k0k0r0 4y ago
  This is such a great idea! Very often I disagree with some comment and nevertheless upvote, because that comment is really thoughtful and is an important contribution to the discussion with important subjects or perspectives that need to be considered.
- k0k0r0 4y ago
  Edit: Sorry about that duplicate. I couldn't see my other comment and thought my phone has failed submitting. Yes, I totally agree. Often I upvote a comment I disagree with since it nevertheless is a thoughtful and important contribution to the discussion. I feel I learn most from people I disagree with.
rwmj 4y ago
Slashdot used to disallow voting if you also comment on the same article.

lexapro 4y ago

I didn't even downvote it, but saying "we are not doing nearly enough, therefore we are doomed" encourages some people to conclude "well, then we can pollute as much as we want, it doesn't matter anyway". Yes, we are on the wrong path, and it's becoming more unrealistic by the day, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't still strive towards 2 degrees.

nosianu 4y ago
> but saying "we are not doing nearly enough, therefore we are doomed OP did not write that at all! He only wrote a single sentence, why did you create new text to criticize and attribute it to OP? I myself keep pointing to the NOAAA page for the CO2 growth rate (https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/gr.html https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/gr.html) - which is positive and increasing. OP is correct and the parent is too. Even the growth rate still increases, it still keeps getting worse faster! It's unpopular on reddit's /r/de too to say that, with similar justification. As if lying and keeping truth away won't hurt much more because no, people are stupid but not completely. In addition here in Germany I got so watch from a front seat how the people in the country react when even just a single fossil fuel is cut - and only partially (even for Germany Russia only supplies a part of the gas, even if it's a substantial one). We actually needed to stop regardless of the Russian situation, for climate change alone. Which nobody ever even dares to mention, the public discussion and what politicians have to say is all about "crisis mode". I have not seen a single politician try to reframe it as "we need to do this anyway", it's either about supporting people financially to be able to afford more expensive gas, about who needs to save, or how and where to get other gas faster than 2024 (deal with Katar for LNG). The head of the state of Saxony warned of "deindustrialization". But we need to cut fossil fuel anyway! Worldwide! The current crisis should be a chance, but it is only seen, and only framed, as "crisis", to be remedied to get back to full gas storage and fully flowing supplies. The situation IS this dire! Try significantly reducing usage of fossil fuels in any country. You get riots. You can plant as many trees and ban plastic straws all you like, the only thing that would make a dent is a significant reduction in removing any more fossil fuels of any kind from below ground to feed it into the above ground carbon cycle. And it is truth that it looks really really bad. That would just limit the growth rate, it still would do nothing towards actually lowering atmospheric CO2.

JadoJodo 4y ago

This was my thought as well. There have been several comments in this thread (and others like it recently) where the content of the comment was: - A thoughtful, non-flippant response and sometimes included citations - In disagreement with the article/other comments - Downvoted almost instantly I personally enjoy reading many of this community's comments, thoughts, and ideas, especially when someone has taken the time to write out a thoughtful response, and even if I may not agree with the conclusion. I really hope others do, as well.

BurningFrog 4y ago

This post is about the imagined mindset of people who downvoted a post, that isn't even downvoted.