Ask HN: Why the downvote mechanism for comments, anyways? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Why the downvote mechanism for comments, anyways?

4 pointsFjolsvith6 comments

As a frequently downvoted commenter on HN, I've done a lot of thinking about this mechanism, and I would like to propose a change to it.

Since the goal of HN is to encourage discussion and debate, why not require a reply to a comment before you can downvote it?

This would change the negative, conversation stifling enablement into one that requires a person to contribute to the discourse before voting their disapproval. It would help to distinguish HN from other driveby, populist moderated forums.

View on HN

Some comments are so stupid and off-topic, example https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22766042, a simple downvote is enough. Engaging in a reply is IMHO just feeding trolls who are trying to be edgy/funny and not add value to the discussion. "He's the one" (in the example), the reply to the "He's the one", the reply to that reply for example. Same for "+1", "LOL" and other one word exclamation comments. Looking at your comments, like "That will touch off the hoarding of kitty litter!", the downvotes are IMHO justified and I'd like to see less of those. I'm kind of saying they're a hint on the quality of said comment.

This is one of those "stupid" comments IMHO. See how there will always be someone that is rubbed the wrong way by someone else's opinion. Someone may or may not reply to my comment but will most likely downvote it due to them agreeing with you for some reason or another. I agree with the OP a response is warranted. Unfortunately a response alone does not guarantee a rebuttal with a solid reason why they disagree, but would slow the easily downvoted comment without some sort of rebuttal.

Your point is taken. However, when a point to a discussion is made that shows logic and is a contribution, it will get downvoted simply because people do not want to try to support a losing argument.

It allows trolls the ability to affect the conversation unpunished.

Edit: I.e. you're a troll if you just driveby downvote a comment without rebuttal. And, if the comment has already been rebutted, you can voice your vote by upvoting the rebuttal just as easily as if you had downvoted the parent.

The problem is that many people downvote because they disagree, rather than as a reflection on the quality of the comment.

Exactly. The mechanism is purposefully being misused, I contend.

Edit: The downvotes prove it!

Downvoting for disagreement has always been the norm, even according to 'PG.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com