Normally I'd say sorry, but this turned out to be so amusing that I guess I'm not sorry. Carry on!
Edit: you guys blow my mind. One of these years we should do this on purpose.
The mystery continues! :)
EDIT: And apparently that % score was discussed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7972234
So maybe percentage is how many people viewed the front page but didn't upvote it (since you can't downvote it)...
... A-a-and it's gone now...
Looks like the percentages appeared, then HN went down briefly (server restart, sorry @dang), and now the percentages are gone.
We prefer to call that "restarting the server" :)
I've criticised a number of projects for overcompressing the problem domain. Larry Wall's written on this eloquently.
And I'm not criticising HN's server infrastructure. Earlier discussion of style/presentation somewhat. Though for that I'm as inclined to criticise overdesign as well -- mostly on other sites, though arguably table-based layouts are a kludge.
50 comments, with 15 grey comments = bad sentiment, lots of negativity, non-productive conversations etc. Then come up with a scoring algorithm, with red being volatile or bad sentiment so the moderators can spot them instantly visually.
Some of the percentages appear related to upvoter count.
There is one with 9 upvoters and a percentage of 33.
My guess is it's a measure of clique voting. X% of people voted on another story together.
Not sure, that may be more complicated than needed, but it seems to be a percent measure of the upvoters.
Of course, now the percentages are gone.
Perhaps part of their security minded hacker detection system. ;)
Not exactly a foolproof test though. I think you're probably still right.
>Posting in epic thread.
On the other hand, I'm not sure that dang would get much value out of this kind of metric unless he was trying to tune the ranking algorithm or something like that.