4 ms·

I disagree completely. Any "feature" that encourages people to spend more energy thinking about the reasons for being down voted is just promoting whinging and

by quesera 11y ago

I disagree completely. Any "feature" that encourages people to spend more energy thinking about the reasons for being down voted is just promoting whinging and self-absorbed discontent. (Which, a: no one wants to see, and b: is bad for the people going through it!) I do feel that down votes should not be used for disagreement, but the practical matter of fact is that they are and will be, both because pg endorses the idea, and because people are people. If they have a negative response to reading something, and a down arrow is convenient, it will be used. Downvotes are not punishment. They just mean someone didn't like what you wrote, but couldn't be arsed to respond. Maybe what you wrote didn't deserve a response, maybe they were confused, maybe the topic is incredibly important to you but not to them. Who cares? We're adults, ja? As an alternative, I wouldn't be disappointed if the threshold for greying out was reduced to -3 or so. And full death at -10? And for new users who might not know why they're being downvoted, how about a link to the rules next to any comment of yours that is score-negative? HN already puts an orange star next to your comments, so the pages are dynamic at least to that extent. Personally, I use downvotes exclusively for hostility. I upvote any greyed comment that is respectful, coherent, and relevant.

DanBC 11y ago
> both because pg endorses the idea He did at one time mention that. But he also said this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1057347 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1057347 which seems to not like downvote for disagreement. > As an alternative, I wouldn't be disappointed if the threshold for greying out was reduced to -3 That feels like a good idea: Don't change the gray level until a post has had 3 downvotes.
tokenadult 11y ago
While I was reading the thread, this comment just posted mentioned that the site founder, pg, has endorsed the idea that the site's rules permit downvoting to express disagreement. By the site rules, implicitly, some comments should be downvoted on sight. http://ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html http://ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html "Essentially there are two rules here: don't post or upvote crap links, and don't be rude or dumb in comment threads." Yes, downvote thoughtfully, and downvote to improve the overall quality of discussion here, but a downvote in an active discussion to silently indicate a comment is 1) uncivil and unconstructive, or 2) factually incorrect, or 3) both is okay. A comment that is solely on the issue of being downvoted is subject to being downvoted on sight, because those sorts of comments are never constructive to the discussion and disfavored by the site guidelines. http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html "Resist complaining about being downmodded. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading." The site founder, pg, (who no longer has an active day-by-day role in moderating the site) has commented that downvotes for disagreement are permitted here. (In order of time of posting.) "I think it's ok to use the up and down arrows to express agreement. Obviously the uparrows aren't only for applauding politeness, so it seems reasonable that the downarrows aren't only for booing rudeness." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171 "IIRC we first had this conversation about a month after launch. Downvotes have always been used to express disagreement." http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=658691 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=658691 "I sometimes downvote things that seem mistaken. I think most users do." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1006808 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1006808 "If there's one thing I wish I could do to improve HN, it would be to detect this sort of middlebrow dismissal algorithmically. . . . . "The problem with the middlebrow dismissal is that it's a magnet for upvotes. The 'U R a fag's get downvoted and end up at the bottom of the page where they cause little trouble. But this sort of comment rises to the top. Things have now gotten to the stage where I flinch slightly as I click on the 'comments' link, bracing myself for the dismissive comment I know will be waiting for me at the top of the page." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4693920 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4693920 This is an ongoing issue, but the key idea is both to upvote and to downvote (and, for that matter, to submit stories and to post comments) in way that elevates the quality of discussion here. Grow a thick enough skin to learn from other users' behavior here, and develop curiosity about why other users might disagree with you, and all will be well.
manidoraisamy 11y ago
> Personally, I use downvotes exclusively for hostility IMO, noobs might think HN community is hostile & leave. Not many noobs would ask for reason, if they feel intimidated - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9179609 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9179609
- ddeck 11y ago
  >IMO, noobs might think HN community is hostile & leave. I believe the parent was referring to downvoting comments that are hostile in tone, not using downvoting as an outlet for his own hostility.
  - spacemanmatt 11y ago
    Tone policing is a form of hostility, too.
    - quesera 11y ago
      Well, yes, then I am intolerant of aggressive behaviour and take action to suppress it and its spread. The simple logic is that hostility obscures the writer's meaning, invites reactive hostility, and pollutes the conversation. I can see no reason to promote it. Slow down, try again without invective, be civil. It works better. We are not the powerless disenfranchised citizens of a dictatorial state with no other means of expression. Some of us might be, actually, but not in this setting.
      - spacemanmatt 11y ago
        Tone policing disenfranchises minority views, period. Doesn't matter whether the context is social justice or database performance; Unless the tone is beyond well-known bounds (e.g. is abusive, flippant, way off-topic, etc.) I don't think it is generally constructive. Edit: I think we're talking past each other on where "tone policing" becomes regular old moderation.
  - manidoraisamy 11y ago
deciplex 11y ago
>As an alternative, I wouldn't be disappointed if the threshold for greying out was reduced to -3 or so. And full death at -10? I think this would go a long way toward resolving people's negative attitudes toward downvotes. The fact that one errant idiot could grey out your post and make it harder for others to read is a bit too far IMO.
agreedownvote 11y ago
> I use downvotes exclusively for hostility hostility, is subjective. It's easy to block out any thoughts not comfortable to us. It's easy to hide behind consensus than risking the cognitive dissonance associated with the truth. The civil libertarian in me likes to see a bit of heat, expression, emotion; within reason. I want to challenge my impulses. I want to grow. Maybe I'm a maverick, but when most people want to downvote, I'd rather see the elaborate more on their unpopular opinion.
- quesera 11y ago
  We agree. Except for the subjective part. I'm not talking about hostility to my beliefs. I'm talking about straightforward aggressive angry spouting that happens occasionally, even here, and destroys any attempt at civility. Up voted. :)

by quesera 11y ago

DanBC 11y ago

> both because pg endorses the idea He did at one time mention that. But he also said this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1057347 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1057347 which seems to not like downvote for disagreement. > As an alternative, I wouldn't be disappointed if the threshold for greying out was reduced to -3 That feels like a good idea: Don't change the gray level until a post has had 3 downvotes.

tokenadult 11y ago

While I was reading the thread, this comment just posted mentioned that the site founder, pg, has endorsed the idea that the site's rules permit downvoting to express disagreement. By the site rules, implicitly, some comments should be downvoted on sight. http://ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html http://ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html "Essentially there are two rules here: don't post or upvote crap links, and don't be rude or dumb in comment threads." Yes, downvote thoughtfully, and downvote to improve the overall quality of discussion here, but a downvote in an active discussion to silently indicate a comment is 1) uncivil and unconstructive, or 2) factually incorrect, or 3) both is okay. A comment that is solely on the issue of being downvoted is subject to being downvoted on sight, because those sorts of comments are never constructive to the discussion and disfavored by the site guidelines. http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html "Resist complaining about being downmodded. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading." The site founder, pg, (who no longer has an active day-by-day role in moderating the site) has commented that downvotes for disagreement are permitted here. (In order of time of posting.) "I think it's ok to use the up and down arrows to express agreement. Obviously the uparrows aren't only for applauding politeness, so it seems reasonable that the downarrows aren't only for booing rudeness." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=117171 "IIRC we first had this conversation about a month after launch. Downvotes have always been used to express disagreement." http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=658691 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=658691 "I sometimes downvote things that seem mistaken. I think most users do." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1006808 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1006808 "If there's one thing I wish I could do to improve HN, it would be to detect this sort of middlebrow dismissal algorithmically. . . . . "The problem with the middlebrow dismissal is that it's a magnet for upvotes. The 'U R a fag's get downvoted and end up at the bottom of the page where they cause little trouble. But this sort of comment rises to the top. Things have now gotten to the stage where I flinch slightly as I click on the 'comments' link, bracing myself for the dismissive comment I know will be waiting for me at the top of the page." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4693920 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4693920 This is an ongoing issue, but the key idea is both to upvote and to downvote (and, for that matter, to submit stories and to post comments) in way that elevates the quality of discussion here. Grow a thick enough skin to learn from other users' behavior here, and develop curiosity about why other users might disagree with you, and all will be well.

manidoraisamy 11y ago

> Personally, I use downvotes exclusively for hostility IMO, noobs might think HN community is hostile & leave. Not many noobs would ask for reason, if they feel intimidated - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9179609 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9179609

ddeck 11y ago
>IMO, noobs might think HN community is hostile & leave. I believe the parent was referring to downvoting comments that are hostile in tone, not using downvoting as an outlet for his own hostility.
- spacemanmatt 11y ago
  Tone policing is a form of hostility, too.
  - quesera 11y ago
    Well, yes, then I am intolerant of aggressive behaviour and take action to suppress it and its spread. The simple logic is that hostility obscures the writer's meaning, invites reactive hostility, and pollutes the conversation. I can see no reason to promote it. Slow down, try again without invective, be civil. It works better. We are not the powerless disenfranchised citizens of a dictatorial state with no other means of expression. Some of us might be, actually, but not in this setting.
    - spacemanmatt 11y ago
      Tone policing disenfranchises minority views, period. Doesn't matter whether the context is social justice or database performance; Unless the tone is beyond well-known bounds (e.g. is abusive, flippant, way off-topic, etc.) I don't think it is generally constructive. Edit: I think we're talking past each other on where "tone policing" becomes regular old moderation.
- manidoraisamy 11y ago

deciplex 11y ago

>As an alternative, I wouldn't be disappointed if the threshold for greying out was reduced to -3 or so. And full death at -10? I think this would go a long way toward resolving people's negative attitudes toward downvotes. The fact that one errant idiot could grey out your post and make it harder for others to read is a bit too far IMO.

agreedownvote 11y ago

> I use downvotes exclusively for hostility hostility, is subjective. It's easy to block out any thoughts not comfortable to us. It's easy to hide behind consensus than risking the cognitive dissonance associated with the truth. The civil libertarian in me likes to see a bit of heat, expression, emotion; within reason. I want to challenge my impulses. I want to grow. Maybe I'm a maverick, but when most people want to downvote, I'd rather see the elaborate more on their unpopular opinion.

quesera 11y ago
We agree. Except for the subjective part. I'm not talking about hostility to my beliefs. I'm talking about straightforward aggressive angry spouting that happens occasionally, even here, and destroys any attempt at civility. Up voted. :)