3 ms·

The main issue with karma is that people sometimes down vote to show disagreement. That's is not what down voting is for, the idea of votes on comments is to ra

The main issue with karma is that people sometimes down vote to show disagreement. That's is not what down voting is for, the idea of votes on comments is to rank them by how much they contribute to the discussion. How interesting they are. Unfortunately there is little that can be done to change this other than education, making it clear what a vote is supposed to mean. If you see your karma going down its supposed to be an indication that you are not contributing in a positive manner not that people disagree with your point of view. We almost need votes on votes to indicate if the vote is constructive or destructive, although that's quite meta. (in all seriousness though there is probably a statistical analysis that can spot the different types of vote)

brudgers 13y ago
Downvotes exist to curb destructive behavior. Sometimes the destructive behavior is actual and embodied in the comment being downvoted. Sometimes the destructive behavior is potential and in the person down voting. I've downvoted bad comments. I've downvoted comments instead of arguing with them. I've downvoted comments because I was feeling ill-will toward the ideas it expressed, and I've even downvoted comments because I didn't hold good-will toward the poster. In each of these cases, I had more destructive alternatives to the down vote. Was it fair? Well when a person has been around long enough, the recognize that these things even themselves out over time. BTW, a community in which everyone votes in assent and descent according to some set of rules, isn't really voting.
running_foo 13y ago
I think downvoters should be public, and also require a short contextual explanation for their downvote (< 100 chars; separate metadata from a comment). This would help curb abusive down-voting. Too many people downvote whimsically simply because they disagree.
- running_foo 13y ago
  The downvote to my comment is case-in-point. Somebody disagreed with what I was saying and downvoted me. I broke no HN policies and my comment was on topic. If they were required to enter a reason as to why they downvoted me, and their name made public, it's highly unlikely they would have downvoted me just because they disagreed.

brudgers 13y ago

Downvotes exist to curb destructive behavior. Sometimes the destructive behavior is actual and embodied in the comment being downvoted. Sometimes the destructive behavior is potential and in the person down voting. I've downvoted bad comments. I've downvoted comments instead of arguing with them. I've downvoted comments because I was feeling ill-will toward the ideas it expressed, and I've even downvoted comments because I didn't hold good-will toward the poster. In each of these cases, I had more destructive alternatives to the down vote. Was it fair? Well when a person has been around long enough, the recognize that these things even themselves out over time. BTW, a community in which everyone votes in assent and descent according to some set of rules, isn't really voting.

running_foo 13y ago

I think downvoters should be public, and also require a short contextual explanation for their downvote (< 100 chars; separate metadata from a comment). This would help curb abusive down-voting. Too many people downvote whimsically simply because they disagree.

running_foo 13y ago
The downvote to my comment is case-in-point. Somebody disagreed with what I was saying and downvoted me. I broke no HN policies and my comment was on topic. If they were required to enter a reason as to why they downvoted me, and their name made public, it's highly unlikely they would have downvoted me just because they disagreed.