3 ms·

>I think the purpose of downvotes is a mild correction Unfortunately, I just don't think people are generally that nuanced with it. But that may not be their f

>I think the purpose of downvotes is a mild correction Unfortunately, I just don't think people are generally that nuanced with it. But that may not be their fault, and instead may be in part due to what I mentioned previously: flags are for inappropriate content, comments should be for disagreement, so where does that leave downvoting? What is a "mild correction"? >I'd like to test the idea of mandatory comment before downvote I have thought this too. I really just think downvotes are childish and counterproductive, but if there must be downvoting, then the downvoter should at least be required to provide a cogent rationale that is subject to the same public scrutiny and potential for discussion. It just seems a perverted incentive to "punish" those who take their time to contribute to the discussion, while allowing the "punisher" to remain anonymous and lazy.

reitanqild 12y ago
- and, of course you received some anonymous downvotes, -have my upvote while we wait for dang and the rest of the team to come up with a good solution. As for your question: What is a "mild correction"? Here is my take on corrections in forums without private messages: 1. Polite follow up question along the lines of: "this doesn't sound right to me, do you have sources for x?"/"did you consider y?" etc - this is the least unoffensive method I know that can be applied without knowing the person you are replying to. 2. Polite explanation of why something is wrong - all while giving the poster a way out: "this is a common misconception ...". Combine with downvotes if necessary. 3. Downvote while pointing out the stupidity of the poster: "This is wrong for reasons x, y and z and you should know better. Check your facts next time." "HN has a long history of civilized discussion and this is not something I would expect to see here and I have downvoted you." "Posts like this makes you look like a tool" etc 4. Report/flag etc Also: "A reproof entereth more into a wise man than an hundred stripes into a fool."
- unclebucknasty 12y ago
  >and, of course you received some anonymous downvotes, -have my upvote while we wait for dang and the rest of the team to come up with a good solution. LOL! That's truly funny, and thanks for your upvote. Yeah, it seems that someone(s) are randomly going about and downvoting my comments everywhere. They apparently have no sense of irony and are consuming their own valuable (or, apparently not-so-valuable) time hunting down a random, anonymous person's comments (mine) to (I suppose) "punish" me for some transgression known only to them. Apparently, they take themselves (along with their little mouse-clicks and my meaningless karma score) very seriously. That this is happening on a site called Hacker News (full of conformist hackers?) is even more ironic. In any case, I think all of your definitions of "mild correction" are as effective and more constructive without the downvotes, and they further encourage discussion on what is effectively a venue for exactly that. But, again, I'll also agree that the supplementary comments with the downvotes are 100% better than downvotes alone.

reitanqild 12y ago

- and, of course you received some anonymous downvotes, -have my upvote while we wait for dang and the rest of the team to come up with a good solution. As for your question: What is a "mild correction"? Here is my take on corrections in forums without private messages: 1. Polite follow up question along the lines of: "this doesn't sound right to me, do you have sources for x?"/"did you consider y?" etc - this is the least unoffensive method I know that can be applied without knowing the person you are replying to. 2. Polite explanation of why something is wrong - all while giving the poster a way out: "this is a common misconception ...". Combine with downvotes if necessary. 3. Downvote while pointing out the stupidity of the poster: "This is wrong for reasons x, y and z and you should know better. Check your facts next time." "HN has a long history of civilized discussion and this is not something I would expect to see here and I have downvoted you." "Posts like this makes you look like a tool" etc 4. Report/flag etc Also: "A reproof entereth more into a wise man than an hundred stripes into a fool."

unclebucknasty 12y ago
>and, of course you received some anonymous downvotes, -have my upvote while we wait for dang and the rest of the team to come up with a good solution. LOL! That's truly funny, and thanks for your upvote. Yeah, it seems that someone(s) are randomly going about and downvoting my comments everywhere. They apparently have no sense of irony and are consuming their own valuable (or, apparently not-so-valuable) time hunting down a random, anonymous person's comments (mine) to (I suppose) "punish" me for some transgression known only to them. Apparently, they take themselves (along with their little mouse-clicks and my meaningless karma score) very seriously. That this is happening on a site called Hacker News (full of conformist hackers?) is even more ironic. In any case, I think all of your definitions of "mild correction" are as effective and more constructive without the downvotes, and they further encourage discussion on what is effectively a venue for exactly that. But, again, I'll also agree that the supplementary comments with the downvotes are 100% better than downvotes alone.