5 ms·

I love this site!.

• jbeja 13y ago
  And the downvotes are for?
  • brudgers 13y ago
    I suspect it is because the comment adds little to the conversation. The possible responses are: Me too. No, you don't. Consider the downvotes as editorial feedback. How could your post be better? Adding supporting rationales, details, or examples which explain why you love HN might improve the communication of your ideas. On the other hand, sometimes posts are simply reactive and cannot really be improved. In that case, consider just deleting the post...in the best case, do so before receiving downvotes.
    • jbeja 13y ago
      I don't realy mind the downvotes, just asking out curiosity and turn out to be a very interesting view: The world is getting darker and darker by seconds.
  • mst 13y ago
    I would suspect the complete lack of content; we like our signal to noise ratio to be as high as possible around here, and applause lights don't really contribute to signal. Sorry.
    • jbeja 13y ago
      Ok!.
      • jrockway 13y ago
        The "!" acts equivalently to a "." in ending a sentence. No need to use both!. But it is kind of fun, now that you mention it!.
    • mindcrime 13y ago
      we like our signal to noise ratio to be as high as possible around here That may be true for select individuals, but I'll posit that it's no longer broadly true for the majority of the people on this site who vote. Going by my own comments (since those are the only ones I can see the score counts for), and comments which are obviously mass-downvoted (grayed out), I see cases all the time where "serious" posts - which are well researched, features citations, links, and serious discussion - languish. Meanwhile, the occasional angry rant directed at a popular "bogeyman" (like the NSA) gets massive upvotes. Honestly, I feel like most of the talk about "signal to noise" ratio here is just a meme itself at this point. Sure, the gratuitously silly stuff gets downvoted to oblivion,
      • mst 13y ago
        Looking at your comments, you seem to prefer a more direct and assertive style of debate than is normal on here. So do I, but I've chosen to adjust because I've found that a harsh tone signals aggression to people here where in other contexts it instead signals passion for the idea. Or: I propose the hypothessis that your calibration for how other people are perceiving things is incorrect, and that if you adjust that, then while there's still a lower percentage for whom it's true than there used to be, on average people still value signal more than you do.
        • mst 13y ago
          Gah. "still value signal more than you think they do". Sorry.
  • lucb1e 13y ago
    I do wonder why this question is downvoted though. People don't have a right to ask anymore?
• eruditely 13y ago
  Cut him some slack guys, I would assume a topic like this gets to be a little more lax than the other threads.