Ask HN: Are Downvotes Necessary? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Are Downvotes Necessary?

5 pointsbriefcomment7 comments

Why are downvotes necessary? In a system with upvotes and flagging, downvotes do not seem to provide any additional value, and likely often stifle conversation on the basis of personal bias.

I often experience downvotes when I post an unpopular opinion, and the downvotes generally outnumber the comments on the post.

In other words, it is too easy for downvotes to be handed out based on biases, and without the need to explicitly state why an idea is worth criticizing.

View on HN

I long wanted downvotes to require comments (that may be displayed privately to the person being downvoted or whatever) to at least put some effort into the downvote.

Silent downvotes just create animosity.

It should take more effort to shit on somebody. I definitely prefer traditional phpbb-style forums with like buttons over threaded reddit-style communities with a "fuck you" option attached to every post. It's a shame the latter seems to be winning out.

I agree. Ironically, 4chan of all sites has an upvote-only (bump, really) policy that, in my opinion, works well.

Some HN lore: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9317916

It's sad how people's egos can feel threatened at the decrement of a 'fake internet point'.

Down votes are good. They help start the conversation of why your comment could be wrong.

I still prefer a symmetric system... Why lose half of the information?

I agree that people should comment better when they interact with a post.

It’s nothing to do with ego.

HN downvotes cause comments to become effectively hidden and unreadable, and while some that receive this fate are just throw away “useless” comments, plenty are not.

The idea that a downvote “starts the conversation” is just plain wrong - people are actively told not to ask why they were downvoted. That’s the opposite of starting a conversation.

I disagree with what you said, but I didn’t downvote you, I replied and told you why. If I, and the other people who Top-commented so far all just downvoted your comment your comment would be literally fading from view, and you’d have zero clue about why people did so.

Maybe not ego. You're probably right. I thought these mystery points feeded on inherent relevancy needs to cull, herd, and raise better content.

I guess its the question of how much down(vote)shun is ok.

If enough people disagreed with what I said, enough people would have saved time by not having to read a greyed out comment.

You're missing the point. Disagreement with a view isn't a reason to prevent others from reading it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com