4 ms·

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.
  - dhimes 15y ago
    I'm totally with you on this. At the very least, if someone down-votes they should reply as to why they disagree. There a great sense of loss when you say something factual and relevant and get down-voted without explanation. When I've brought these issues up in the past, the conversation usually resolves with "don't worry about karma." And, I don't, but it does change the community, and about that I worry. Basically, the community will turn into whatever is rewarded. If you reward hive-mindedness, that's what you'll get. If you reward interesting discourse, that's what you'll get.
    - 0xABADC0DA 15y ago
      I'd like to see anonymous upvotes, but when you downvote you have to leave a comment or it says 'downvoted by UserName' (maybe only for negative-karma comments). It turns a downvote from 'I disagree' to 'I disagree and everybody else you should too'. You have to be willing to risk your own karma to take away somebody else's. For instance the way HN works now afaik, somebody could post 'me too' comments to get enough karma to downvote, then turn around, downvote all posts supporting some idea they dislike, and there would be no way for other posters to correct this or know it was happening.
      - jessriedel 15y ago
        > For instance the way HN works now afaik, somebody could post 'me too' comments to get enough karma to downvote, then turn around, downvote all posts supporting some idea they dislike, and there would be no way for other posters to correct this or know it was happening. FYI, I think that this is supposed to be automatically detected and nullified by the website software, although I can't speak to the details.

I downvoted you because I don't agree with you.

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.
- dhimes 15y ago
  I'm totally with you on this. At the very least, if someone down-votes they should reply as to why they disagree. There a great sense of loss when you say something factual and relevant and get down-voted without explanation. When I've brought these issues up in the past, the conversation usually resolves with "don't worry about karma." And, I don't, but it does change the community, and about that I worry. Basically, the community will turn into whatever is rewarded. If you reward hive-mindedness, that's what you'll get. If you reward interesting discourse, that's what you'll get.
  - 0xABADC0DA 15y ago
    I'd like to see anonymous upvotes, but when you downvote you have to leave a comment or it says 'downvoted by UserName' (maybe only for negative-karma comments). It turns a downvote from 'I disagree' to 'I disagree and everybody else you should too'. You have to be willing to risk your own karma to take away somebody else's. For instance the way HN works now afaik, somebody could post 'me too' comments to get enough karma to downvote, then turn around, downvote all posts supporting some idea they dislike, and there would be no way for other posters to correct this or know it was happening.
    - jessriedel 15y ago
      > For instance the way HN works now afaik, somebody could post 'me too' comments to get enough karma to downvote, then turn around, downvote all posts supporting some idea they dislike, and there would be no way for other posters to correct this or know it was happening. FYI, I think that this is supposed to be automatically detected and nullified by the website software, although I can't speak to the details.