4 ms·

I'm very sorry it has come this far. It's easy to forget we have a tendency to make remarks about people online that we would never bring up in a personal conv

by Udo 13y ago

I'm very sorry it has come this far. It's easy to forget we have a tendency to make remarks about people online that we would never bring up in a personal conversation. I'm not excluding myself here, I too feel I'm sometimes harsher online than offline - and it sadly also happened in the Dave Winer thread yesterday. People can come across in a certain way through their writing that we would never attribute to them if we met them face to face - yet that's all we have to go on in most cases. Keeping these difficulties in mind that are inherent to all online communities, I think this article is a damning statement about our discussion style here specifically. It's important to acknowledge that most commenters on HN do not behave that way, but some do and they are very loud. To make matters worse, "good" people sometimes overshoot their target because something in a news item or an article pushes their buttons, leading to a disproportionate response. All in all I think HN has a lot to offer. I said it before, but it bears repeating: I come here to have insightful discussions with clever people who sometimes disagree with me. HN is the only community that does this for me, because I feel there are many like-minded hackers present who have a lot of value to contribute through both their work and their opinions. At the same time I believe we should take a long hard look at these other instances where we're simply not at our best. Again, this includes myself specifically.

MatthewPhillips 13y ago
Good post. It bears mentioning that any time you press reply it's prudent to think about whether your comments present you in the light you want people to see you.
micampe 13y ago
I agree with Dave. Many people on HN don't even try to apply critical thinking and judge facts as they are. They prefer to go with conspiracy theories or versions of stories that fits their existing ideas or make their favorite team look good, without considering any other possible explanation.
- pjscott 13y ago
  That criticism applies to most people, everywhere. Shockingly lazy thinking and blind tribalism are the rule, not the exception. Just look at any popular discussion forum, or most news stories involving politics or famous people, or almost anyone who is angry.
smacktoward 13y ago
"It's important to acknowledge that most commenters on HN do not behave that way, but some do and they are very loud." I think part of this is just the dynamics of community-moderated comments. In my experience, the way to get upvotes in any such forum (not just HN) is to express an opinion in the strongest terms you possibly can. "X is dead" gets upvotes. "X has some challenges to overcome, and it might" doesn't. People like and respond to simple, clear arguments that don't admit weakness or uncertainty. This dynamic then feeds on itself, as the people who are the best at forcefully stating their opinions become top commenters, crowding out more cautious voices and providing a bad role model that the next generation of would-be top commenters follows. How do you fix this? It's poisoned so many great communities I've belonged to, so I wish I knew. But I don't. EDIT: I have seen one mechanism that helps mitigate this: hide the users' actual karma scores. Karma is a scoring mechanism. That turns forums that use it into a video game (of the type very well parodied by http://www.forumwarz.com/about http://www.forumwarz.com/about). Participants compete with each other to see who can get the highest score. Hiding the actual numbers from users takes some of the fun out of this, which cuts down on trolling. Slashdot used to show your exact karma score, and they had these exact same problems. Eventually they switched to just a text label ("Excellent", say, for high-karma users) that indicated your general karmic position, and the comments got a lot better very fast. Nobody's going to put as much time in to go from "Excellent" to "Excellent" as they might to go from, say, 2,500 to 5,000.
- npsimons 13y ago
  In my experience, the way to get upvotes in any such forum (not just HN) is to express an opinion in the strongest terms you possibly can. "X is dead" gets upvotes. "X has some challenges to overcome, and it might" doesn't. Of the most satisfying outcomes on HN, mine have been when I've posted a reasoned, moderate comment and been upvoted. Sure, I try and avoid flamefests, and I've noticed a bit of trolling being upvoted, but overall, I think HN has risen above. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm lucky, but it doesn't seem that bad, yet. Of course, there's always room for improvement . . .
- ionforce 13y ago
  You fix it with heavy-handed moderation that actively punishes curtly written content.
sageikosa 13y ago
I try hard to avoid attacking people (even if they attack me), and address the points of whatever argument, observation or value judgment (if any) was made in a comment. I figure I won't change the mind of someone so obviously misguided, but I can still make the case for the reader who is trying to sort things out.

by Udo 13y ago

MatthewPhillips 13y ago

Good post. It bears mentioning that any time you press reply it's prudent to think about whether your comments present you in the light you want people to see you.

micampe 13y ago

I agree with Dave. Many people on HN don't even try to apply critical thinking and judge facts as they are. They prefer to go with conspiracy theories or versions of stories that fits their existing ideas or make their favorite team look good, without considering any other possible explanation.

pjscott 13y ago
That criticism applies to most people, everywhere. Shockingly lazy thinking and blind tribalism are the rule, not the exception. Just look at any popular discussion forum, or most news stories involving politics or famous people, or almost anyone who is angry.

smacktoward 13y ago

"It's important to acknowledge that most commenters on HN do not behave that way, but some do and they are very loud." I think part of this is just the dynamics of community-moderated comments. In my experience, the way to get upvotes in any such forum (not just HN) is to express an opinion in the strongest terms you possibly can. "X is dead" gets upvotes. "X has some challenges to overcome, and it might" doesn't. People like and respond to simple, clear arguments that don't admit weakness or uncertainty. This dynamic then feeds on itself, as the people who are the best at forcefully stating their opinions become top commenters, crowding out more cautious voices and providing a bad role model that the next generation of would-be top commenters follows. How do you fix this? It's poisoned so many great communities I've belonged to, so I wish I knew. But I don't. EDIT: I have seen one mechanism that helps mitigate this: hide the users' actual karma scores. Karma is a scoring mechanism. That turns forums that use it into a video game (of the type very well parodied by http://www.forumwarz.com/about http://www.forumwarz.com/about). Participants compete with each other to see who can get the highest score. Hiding the actual numbers from users takes some of the fun out of this, which cuts down on trolling. Slashdot used to show your exact karma score, and they had these exact same problems. Eventually they switched to just a text label ("Excellent", say, for high-karma users) that indicated your general karmic position, and the comments got a lot better very fast. Nobody's going to put as much time in to go from "Excellent" to "Excellent" as they might to go from, say, 2,500 to 5,000.

npsimons 13y ago
In my experience, the way to get upvotes in any such forum (not just HN) is to express an opinion in the strongest terms you possibly can. "X is dead" gets upvotes. "X has some challenges to overcome, and it might" doesn't. Of the most satisfying outcomes on HN, mine have been when I've posted a reasoned, moderate comment and been upvoted. Sure, I try and avoid flamefests, and I've noticed a bit of trolling being upvoted, but overall, I think HN has risen above. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm lucky, but it doesn't seem that bad, yet. Of course, there's always room for improvement . . .
ionforce 13y ago
You fix it with heavy-handed moderation that actively punishes curtly written content.

sageikosa 13y ago

I try hard to avoid attacking people (even if they attack me), and address the points of whatever argument, observation or value judgment (if any) was made in a comment. I figure I won't change the mind of someone so obviously misguided, but I can still make the case for the reader who is trying to sort things out.