4 ms·

Well, it shows the incentive to run a product company. Even with a monopoly on consulting you're not going to have great profit margins. That said, it really p

Well, it shows the incentive to run a product company. Even with a monopoly on consulting you're not going to have great profit margins. That said, it really pisses me off that you were down voted like you were. There seems to be a rash of that on HN now. You were contributing to the conversation and backing up your argument with numbers. Right or wrong, that doesn't deserve a drive by dismissal. The voting buttons mean "More or less of this content on HN", not "I agree or disagree". If you disagree, post a reply. You might teach the OP something, or might even learn that you're wrong, as I have plenty of times on HN. Edit: I've turned this into an Ask HN thread here, since I think it would be helpful to have a discussion about this: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3760275 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3760275

avree 15y ago
Actually, pg has stated that the downvote arrows mean the latter. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171
- david927 15y ago
  Paul is wrong on this, though. We as the community should override that.
  - rudiger 15y ago
    I downvoted you because I don't agree with you.
  - rimantas 15y ago
    Let's be fair, people up-vote the stuff they like/agree with whether it contributes a lot or little. Symmetrical actions in UI should do symmetrical things, how hard is to grasp it? Something I like/agree—up-vote. Something I disagree—down-vote. If you want different behavior then remove down-vote button. There is "flag" if one thinks comment is inappropriate.
    - nitrogen 15y ago
      Flagging a comment can get the entire account banned, so use that option with care. Also, there are more important things to consider than an OCD-fueled (yes, this affects me, too) obsession with UI symmetry, like overall discussion quality.
    - rwmj 15y ago
      Slashdot got this (nearly) right. You select from a list of moderation options like "Interesting", "Informative", "Funny", "Off Topic" etc.
      - flomo 15y ago
        Insightful - I agree, completely Informative - I agree, but you may be full of shit Interesting - I agree, stick it to those other guys Funny - I agree, either schadenfreude or grits Idealistically, humans would only vote based on content quality and not their personal opinions. But Slashdot is certainly the counter example on why this doesn't actually work
        riffraff 15y ago
        I guess the rationale for slashdot's voting "values" is that they are also moderated. So "Insightful" as an "I agree, completely" on something that is not insightful may be metamoderated out. It's basically impossible to do that if the value is only "+1".
    - pbreit 15y ago
      But downvoting has materially different results (disappearing text, banning). I downvoted you not because I disagree with you but because you matter-of-factly made obviously false comments.
    - jessriedel 15y ago
      > Let's be fair, people up-vote the stuff they like/agree with whether it contributes a lot or little. But they shouldn't do this either. Personally, I try to downvote--or at least not upvote--comments which I agree with but which add nothing to the discussion. (I'm sure I'm far from consistent, of course.) I mean, the functional use of votes is to organize the comments page. It just makes zero sense to organize the page based on the average opinion of the community rather than constructiveness/usefulness of the comments. PG is wrong here.
- reitzensteinm 15y ago
  Well, thanks for not just downvoting me :) PG posted that comment five years ago; reflexive downvoting just wasn't a problem then like it is now[1], so I'd be interested in hearing if he's still got the same opinion - it wouldn't change mine, though. [1] It's easy to look at the past through rose colored glasses, but that's not what I'm doing in this case. I actually think most of HN has improved with its new size. Niche areas are more likely to have discussions between experts, there are more people like Grellas who write lengthy and insightful commentary, a significant number of startups get successfully launched on HN, and we still managed to do all that without making too many of the original core users leave. That said, get off my lawn. Edit: Now you're being downvoted. This is ridiculous.
  - willvarfar 15y ago
    This tangent is close to my heart - what we need is a filter bubble! http://williamedwardscoder.tumblr.com/post/15581427232/self-organizing-reddit http://williamedwardscoder.tumblr.com/post/15581427232/self-...
- vacri 15y ago
  Silent disagreement should not stop someone from being heard.
- doktrin 15y ago
  Maintaining a civil discussion is one thing. Literally silencing and erasing opinions we do not agree with is completely different. Does anyone actually believes this is the approach we should be taking?
kinleyd 15y ago
I tend to agree that using a down vote to express disagreement eventually isn't constructive. I've seen a number of posts that didn't say anything objectionable or controversial, nor were meaningless in the context of the discussion, and yet were down modded. My theory is that while the risk of being down modded on HN is a helpful factor in keeping discussions more courteous than on an out-and-out anonymous forum, the same cannot be said of down votes, which are in fact anonymous. As a result, users tend to be more careless or perhaps even callous in the use of down votes. I'm not sure what the solution is though: making down votes transparent might help in creating a bit more discreetness in their use, but might spill things over into flame wars into the comments themselves when exercised. Still, I think it's the total anonymity that causes its over use.
throwaway00 15y ago
More worrying is the fact that when downvoted too much, your account gets 'silently banned'. Also if you post anything critical of YC companies this tends to happen. Behind the scenes, many accounts are silently banned, and many comments are removed if they don't sit well with the powers that be. If you're pg and you disagree, you don't downvote, you just remove the comment you disagree with.

avree 15y ago

Actually, pg has stated that the downvote arrows mean the latter. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171

david927 15y ago
Paul is wrong on this, though. We as the community should override that.
- rudiger 15y ago
  I downvoted you because I don't agree with you.
- rimantas 15y ago
  Let's be fair, people up-vote the stuff they like/agree with whether it contributes a lot or little. Symmetrical actions in UI should do symmetrical things, how hard is to grasp it? Something I like/agree—up-vote. Something I disagree—down-vote. If you want different behavior then remove down-vote button. There is "flag" if one thinks comment is inappropriate.
  - nitrogen 15y ago
    Flagging a comment can get the entire account banned, so use that option with care. Also, there are more important things to consider than an OCD-fueled (yes, this affects me, too) obsession with UI symmetry, like overall discussion quality.
  - rwmj 15y ago
    Slashdot got this (nearly) right. You select from a list of moderation options like "Interesting", "Informative", "Funny", "Off Topic" etc.
    - flomo 15y ago
      Insightful - I agree, completely Informative - I agree, but you may be full of shit Interesting - I agree, stick it to those other guys Funny - I agree, either schadenfreude or grits Idealistically, humans would only vote based on content quality and not their personal opinions. But Slashdot is certainly the counter example on why this doesn't actually work
      - riffraff 15y ago
        I guess the rationale for slashdot's voting "values" is that they are also moderated. So "Insightful" as an "I agree, completely" on something that is not insightful may be metamoderated out. It's basically impossible to do that if the value is only "+1".
  - pbreit 15y ago
    But downvoting has materially different results (disappearing text, banning). I downvoted you not because I disagree with you but because you matter-of-factly made obviously false comments.
  - jessriedel 15y ago
    > Let's be fair, people up-vote the stuff they like/agree with whether it contributes a lot or little. But they shouldn't do this either. Personally, I try to downvote--or at least not upvote--comments which I agree with but which add nothing to the discussion. (I'm sure I'm far from consistent, of course.) I mean, the functional use of votes is to organize the comments page. It just makes zero sense to organize the page based on the average opinion of the community rather than constructiveness/usefulness of the comments. PG is wrong here.
reitzensteinm 15y ago
Well, thanks for not just downvoting me :) PG posted that comment five years ago; reflexive downvoting just wasn't a problem then like it is now[1], so I'd be interested in hearing if he's still got the same opinion - it wouldn't change mine, though. [1] It's easy to look at the past through rose colored glasses, but that's not what I'm doing in this case. I actually think most of HN has improved with its new size. Niche areas are more likely to have discussions between experts, there are more people like Grellas who write lengthy and insightful commentary, a significant number of startups get successfully launched on HN, and we still managed to do all that without making too many of the original core users leave. That said, get off my lawn. Edit: Now you're being downvoted. This is ridiculous.
- willvarfar 15y ago
  This tangent is close to my heart - what we need is a filter bubble! http://williamedwardscoder.tumblr.com/post/15581427232/self-organizing-reddit http://williamedwardscoder.tumblr.com/post/15581427232/self-...
vacri 15y ago
Silent disagreement should not stop someone from being heard.
doktrin 15y ago
Maintaining a civil discussion is one thing. Literally silencing and erasing opinions we do not agree with is completely different. Does anyone actually believes this is the approach we should be taking?

kinleyd 15y ago

I tend to agree that using a down vote to express disagreement eventually isn't constructive. I've seen a number of posts that didn't say anything objectionable or controversial, nor were meaningless in the context of the discussion, and yet were down modded. My theory is that while the risk of being down modded on HN is a helpful factor in keeping discussions more courteous than on an out-and-out anonymous forum, the same cannot be said of down votes, which are in fact anonymous. As a result, users tend to be more careless or perhaps even callous in the use of down votes. I'm not sure what the solution is though: making down votes transparent might help in creating a bit more discreetness in their use, but might spill things over into flame wars into the comments themselves when exercised. Still, I think it's the total anonymity that causes its over use.

throwaway00 15y ago

More worrying is the fact that when downvoted too much, your account gets 'silently banned'. Also if you post anything critical of YC companies this tends to happen. Behind the scenes, many accounts are silently banned, and many comments are removed if they don't sit well with the powers that be. If you're pg and you disagree, you don't downvote, you just remove the comment you disagree with.