Hacker News Reader

Comment by CivBase | Hacker News Reader

To me, an upvote just means "I think more people should see this" and a downvote just means "I think fewer people should see this".

If I simply disagree with someone, I prefer to reply (or upvote someone else's reply) with an explanation of why I disagree. I try to only downvote posts with whom I disagree if I believe they are being mean.

As for my own posts, I do get frustrated when I am downvoted but nobody replies with an explanation for why they downvoted me. I leave comments on sites like HN because I want to evolve my own thoughts on the subject and help others evolve theirs. So to me a downvoted post with no replies is a missed opportunity to evolve my thoughts and better understand those who disagree with me. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like this site applies to HN comments.

View on HN

> I think more people should see this

I'll often upvote posts I disagree with if I feel others should see the the counter arguments..

Similarly, if the best comment in a thread is deep in a thread, I'll upvote every one of its parent comments too, regardless of their content.

The person who downvoted has to look out for themselves though. They may earnestly want to explain their choice so you can engage with their counter-points, but other observers on HN are extremely discourteous. Signaling disagreement usually just causes a flood of tribalistic downvotes or upvotes for in-group voting, as well as people disingenuously using the flag option, and spamming rebuttals, especially disingenuous calls for data or evidence or “citation needed” requests that aren’t actually in the spirit on engagement, just serve to DDoS real disagreement out of the conversation.

A silent downvote lets you avoid a lot of that, even if you respect the premise of the original post you downvoted.

I've tried to be transparent on another site by explaining why I downvoted a comment, but the aggravation of being downvoted in retaliation, having to engage in back-and-forth with the commenter defending themselves, and being stalked and downvoted consistently afterwards made it frankly not worth it.

This is a noble goal, and might work on StackOverflow, but I doubt it will get much traction.

I think more people should see this.

I can't agree more with your comment about wishing people would reply with reasoning rather than simply downvoting.

When I jump into a heated conversation or comment on an emotional topic, I am fully aware that I'm asking for downvotes without responses. But that has served as a negative reinforcement for making said comments, which leads to me engaging in those conversations much less often.

My point is, I'm not sure this is a bug. I'm pretty sure its a feature.

>"I think fewer people should see this"

Would not it be better not to play nanny and let readers decide for themselves?

You could certainly take that approach, but then why have a voting system at all? My understanding is that the voting system for HN comments is intended to promote the best comments to the top.

Ok, here comes timeless saying: The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Most voted and the best can be two different things.

I completely agree. Comment voting has plenty of problems. However, I haven't found or thought of a better solution so I try to make do with what we have.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com