3 ms·

Kudos is not about etiquette it's about what motivates people to upvote or downvote and this differs from person to person. Personally I value truth, humour an

Kudos is not about etiquette it's about what motivates people to upvote or downvote and this differs from person to person. Personally I value truth, humour and interesting information. You will note that etiquette isn't part of my up/down voting practice. Other people have different rules. Kudos is a reflection of the community which means that the community is (if we follow your theory) slightly rude. I don't have a problem with this. I do however have a problem with NOT downvoting thoughtful comments I disagree with. I think it's rude to tell people that they should think like you. I would downvote you for this but etiquette isn't part of my kudos practice and I think this discussion is interesting.

scott_s 17y ago
The purpose of karma on HN is to promote civil discussion, not to show agreement or disagreement. Hence, downmodding comments that you disagree with, yet are still valid, runs counter to the system's intended use.
- Quarrelsome 17y ago
  Aye but purpose ain't always what implementation becomes, people game systems. So the utopian ideal is civil discussion but the reality of it is whatever people decide and you can't control the people.
  - scott_s 17y ago
    This is true, which is why it's worthwhile discussion what the karma system here is supposed to be. If you deliberately don't use it that way, then I find that sad because I like PG's goal. As he explicitly states, this site is partially an experiment. I hope it's not a negative result.
- mhb 17y ago
  Maybe that's not the purpose of karma on HN. Maybe the purpose is to assist its users in making judgments about various issues. If a bunch of smart people read a thoughtful comment and indicate their agreement or disagreement via voting, why isn't that useful to someone when forming their own opinion? As an analogy, consider the issue of global warming. Very few people can invest the time to decide the issue based on primary research. Instead they rely on secondary or tertiary reports, consensus of the scientists involved and their reputations. This is the comment karma system made large.
  - scott_s 17y ago
    I use the moderation system here as an asymmetric control: if I agree/like something, I upvote it. I don't downvote if I disagree/dislike something. I only downvote when I think something is not a part of legitimate discussion. If I encounter a 0 or -1 post that I think is legit, I will upvote it.

scott_s 17y ago

The purpose of karma on HN is to promote civil discussion, not to show agreement or disagreement. Hence, downmodding comments that you disagree with, yet are still valid, runs counter to the system's intended use.

Quarrelsome 17y ago
Aye but purpose ain't always what implementation becomes, people game systems. So the utopian ideal is civil discussion but the reality of it is whatever people decide and you can't control the people.
- scott_s 17y ago
  This is true, which is why it's worthwhile discussion what the karma system here is supposed to be. If you deliberately don't use it that way, then I find that sad because I like PG's goal. As he explicitly states, this site is partially an experiment. I hope it's not a negative result.
mhb 17y ago
Maybe that's not the purpose of karma on HN. Maybe the purpose is to assist its users in making judgments about various issues. If a bunch of smart people read a thoughtful comment and indicate their agreement or disagreement via voting, why isn't that useful to someone when forming their own opinion? As an analogy, consider the issue of global warming. Very few people can invest the time to decide the issue based on primary research. Instead they rely on secondary or tertiary reports, consensus of the scientists involved and their reputations. This is the comment karma system made large.
- scott_s 17y ago
  I use the moderation system here as an asymmetric control: if I agree/like something, I upvote it. I don't downvote if I disagree/dislike something. I only downvote when I think something is not a part of legitimate discussion. If I encounter a 0 or -1 post that I think is legit, I will upvote it.