5 ms·

Offtopic but, I'd love to see a site where any downvote MUST have a comment associated with it, that way one has to validate their downvotes. A downvote can be

Offtopic but, I'd love to see a site where any downvote MUST have a comment associated with it, that way one has to validate their downvotes. A downvote can be agreed with (increasing the downvote) without comment though, like saying "Yes I agree with what this person says is wrong with this".

jbert 15y ago
Slashdot (the pioneer in this sort of moderation) has always had a 'reason code' for up and down votes (and meta-moderation to check that the reason codes are good). This allows you to do things like filter results to only high scores, excluding 'funny'.
- starwed 15y ago
  Even just separate buttons for "funny" and "informative/insightful" would be pretty nice on reddit or HN. Slashdot's comment moderation system always seemed to work pretty well to me. The general editorial quality is what made me give up on them. (When I checked back recently, most submissions were incredibly blatant flamebait.)
  - zem 15y ago
    i actually gave up on slashdot because the comment system had a very clunky feel to it, to the extent that it made the site offputting to use. i likewise do not participate on the making light boards, for the same reason, even though in both cases the actual quality of the discussion is excellent. reddit has nailed that aspect.
    - starwed 15y ago
      The actual slashdot interface is pretty bad, but I don't think the mechanics of the voting system are to blame.
      - zem 15y ago
        yeah, that's what i meant. the voting system is fine; it's the commenting interface that's broken.
TylerE 15y ago
That would make things worse. The biggest problem with Reddit right now is that not enough people downvote weak content. Making downvotes harder will only increase the rate at which the 4chan refugees meme the place up.
- Anechoic 15y ago
  The biggest problem with Reddit right now is that not enough people downvote weak content IMO the biggest problem with Reddit is that too many people downvote well-supported arguments because it goes against their belief system which really stymies the conversation. I'd like to see downvotes haves some 'cost' associated with them so they are used sparingly and on content that really deserves to be downvoted.
  - mkr-hn 15y ago
    The problem with this is that even the best communities have types of arguments that get plenty of upvotes. That would make it easy for someone who knows how to win upvotes to get all the downvote points they need, while making it hard on people who play fairly.
    - Anechoic 15y ago
      It doesn't have to be "downvote points", perhaps it's a limit on downvotes per day, perhaps it's a hit on karma (every downvote means a costs x number of karma points, and below a certain karma you can no longer downvote), etc. There's always going to be a way for determined users to get around the limits, but if it can reduce the number of reflexive downvotes from most users it could still be a net win.
    - adharmad 15y ago
      One tweak to this can be to segregate karma points by category (or sub-reddit). That way, any downvote points that you need will need to be "earned" in the same topic.
    - saryant 15y ago
      This was essentially Slashdot's approach to voting. Make mod points a sparse currency, forcing users to be far more cautious in their use of them. I don't agree with their policy that those who vote in a thread may not comment in that thread but I think a lot can still be learned from Slashdot's model.
VMG 15y ago
I have often wondered what HN would look like if comments had only "upvote" and "flag" options. The "flag" option would have to include a reason ("offensive", "off-topic", "spam")
- Kaizyn 15y ago
  Earlier on, PG experimented with an upvote only scheme and later discarded it. I don't recall if any public reason was given for why the experiment failed, but downvotes were found to be of sufficient value to be worth retaining.
- kisielk 15y ago
  That sounds like Slashdot's moderation system.
  - VMG 15y ago
    Except on slashdot you also have to state a reason for upvoting. The main problem with downvoting for me is that often people vote down out of disagreement, resulting in groupthink. In my opinion, downvotes should hide comments and punish commenters that don't contribute to the discussion. By making downvoting slightly harder, you could focus on the proper subset of comments that should be punished, like spam and insults. (and by the way fix the UI problem of two arrows that are much too close to each other)
StavrosK 15y ago
Or maybe you could have an "Agree/disagree with parent" on your comment and the top comment got one upvote/downvote for each one of your upvotes, respectively. There are lots of things you can do, who knows if they have any effect, though...
tikhonj 15y ago
While not directly comparable, this is almost what StackOverflow does. They don't force you to comment, but if you downvote they ask you to comment and the community does not approve of random downvotes. Additionally, downvoting costs a bit of rep. In all, this means downvotes are uncommon; usually, people try to fix the problem (editing or asking the writer to edit). However, if something is downvoted, it is extremely likely that that post is irrelevant or actively wrong.
jedberg 15y ago
We thought about doing that a long time ago, but then figured all you would see is a bunch of comments that were just "." or something similarly useless. There would be no reasonable way to force people to make a useful comment.

jbert 15y ago

Slashdot (the pioneer in this sort of moderation) has always had a 'reason code' for up and down votes (and meta-moderation to check that the reason codes are good). This allows you to do things like filter results to only high scores, excluding 'funny'.

starwed 15y ago
Even just separate buttons for "funny" and "informative/insightful" would be pretty nice on reddit or HN. Slashdot's comment moderation system always seemed to work pretty well to me. The general editorial quality is what made me give up on them. (When I checked back recently, most submissions were incredibly blatant flamebait.)
- zem 15y ago
  i actually gave up on slashdot because the comment system had a very clunky feel to it, to the extent that it made the site offputting to use. i likewise do not participate on the making light boards, for the same reason, even though in both cases the actual quality of the discussion is excellent. reddit has nailed that aspect.
  - starwed 15y ago
    The actual slashdot interface is pretty bad, but I don't think the mechanics of the voting system are to blame.
    - zem 15y ago
      yeah, that's what i meant. the voting system is fine; it's the commenting interface that's broken.

TylerE 15y ago

That would make things worse. The biggest problem with Reddit right now is that not enough people downvote weak content. Making downvotes harder will only increase the rate at which the 4chan refugees meme the place up.

Anechoic 15y ago
The biggest problem with Reddit right now is that not enough people downvote weak content IMO the biggest problem with Reddit is that too many people downvote well-supported arguments because it goes against their belief system which really stymies the conversation. I'd like to see downvotes haves some 'cost' associated with them so they are used sparingly and on content that really deserves to be downvoted.
- mkr-hn 15y ago
  The problem with this is that even the best communities have types of arguments that get plenty of upvotes. That would make it easy for someone who knows how to win upvotes to get all the downvote points they need, while making it hard on people who play fairly.
  - Anechoic 15y ago
    It doesn't have to be "downvote points", perhaps it's a limit on downvotes per day, perhaps it's a hit on karma (every downvote means a costs x number of karma points, and below a certain karma you can no longer downvote), etc. There's always going to be a way for determined users to get around the limits, but if it can reduce the number of reflexive downvotes from most users it could still be a net win.
  - adharmad 15y ago
    One tweak to this can be to segregate karma points by category (or sub-reddit). That way, any downvote points that you need will need to be "earned" in the same topic.
  - saryant 15y ago
    This was essentially Slashdot's approach to voting. Make mod points a sparse currency, forcing users to be far more cautious in their use of them. I don't agree with their policy that those who vote in a thread may not comment in that thread but I think a lot can still be learned from Slashdot's model.

VMG 15y ago

I have often wondered what HN would look like if comments had only "upvote" and "flag" options. The "flag" option would have to include a reason ("offensive", "off-topic", "spam")

Kaizyn 15y ago
Earlier on, PG experimented with an upvote only scheme and later discarded it. I don't recall if any public reason was given for why the experiment failed, but downvotes were found to be of sufficient value to be worth retaining.
kisielk 15y ago
That sounds like Slashdot's moderation system.
- VMG 15y ago
  Except on slashdot you also have to state a reason for upvoting. The main problem with downvoting for me is that often people vote down out of disagreement, resulting in groupthink. In my opinion, downvotes should hide comments and punish commenters that don't contribute to the discussion. By making downvoting slightly harder, you could focus on the proper subset of comments that should be punished, like spam and insults. (and by the way fix the UI problem of two arrows that are much too close to each other)

StavrosK 15y ago

Or maybe you could have an "Agree/disagree with parent" on your comment and the top comment got one upvote/downvote for each one of your upvotes, respectively. There are lots of things you can do, who knows if they have any effect, though...

tikhonj 15y ago

While not directly comparable, this is almost what StackOverflow does. They don't force you to comment, but if you downvote they ask you to comment and the community does not approve of random downvotes. Additionally, downvoting costs a bit of rep. In all, this means downvotes are uncommon; usually, people try to fix the problem (editing or asking the writer to edit). However, if something is downvoted, it is extremely likely that that post is irrelevant or actively wrong.

jedberg 15y ago

We thought about doing that a long time ago, but then figured all you would see is a bunch of comments that were just "." or something similarly useless. There would be no reasonable way to force people to make a useful comment.